Re: Update low-level backup documentation to match actual behavior

From: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Update low-level backup documentation to match actual behavior
Date: 2017-08-25 19:10:48
Message-ID: 4c7e44d1-a4a2-84d3-206f-f70551622a52@pgmasters.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/24/17 7:36 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> True as well. The patch looks good to me. If a committer does not show
> up soon, it may be better to register that in the CF and wait. I am
> not sure that adding an open item is suited, as docs have the same
> problem on 9.6.

Robert said he would commit this so I expect he'll do that if he doesn't
have any objections to the changes.

Robert, if you would prefer me to submit this to the CF I'm happy to do so.

Thanks,
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-08-25 19:13:14 Re: Update low-level backup documentation to match actual behavior
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-08-25 19:01:38 Re: [PATCH] Push limit to sort through a subquery