Re: Duplicate history file?

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Duplicate history file?
Date: 2021-06-09 02:47:21
Message-ID: 36904a57-5668-6f7a-de92-78b7c366e65f@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2021/06/08 18:19, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
> I've tried your patch. Unfortunately, it didn't seem to have any good
> effect on the script I sent to reproduce the problem.

Oops! The patch forgot about history files.

I checked the attached with your repro script and it works fine.

> I understand that, as Stefan says, the test and cp commands have
> problems and should not be used for archive commands. Maybe this is not
> a big problem for the community.
> Nevertheless, even if we do not improve the feature, I think it is a
> good idea to explicitly state in the documentation that archiving may
> fail under certain conditions for new users.
>
> I'd like to hear the opinions of experts on the archive command.
>
> P.S.
> My customer's problem has already been solved, so it's ok. I've
> emailed -hackers with the aim of preventing users from encountering
> the same problem.
>
I understand that.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

Attachment Content-Type Size
avoid_duplicate_archiving_PoC3.patch.txt text/plain 3.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2021-06-09 02:50:10 Re: Unused function parameter in get_qual_from_partbound()
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-06-09 02:44:27 Re: Adjust pg_regress output for new long test names