| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Rename backup_label to recovery_control |
| Date: | 2023-10-16 17:28:06 |
| Message-ID: | 5cd54c1e71953d6268ff7f17df7f0d9b7e2a101e.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2023-10-16 at 12:12 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 12:06 PM Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> > Not sure what to do about this, but as people/companies start moving to
> > 15, I am afraid we will get people complaining about this. I think
> > having exclusive mode still be the default for pg_start_backup() (albeit
> > deprecated) in one release and then dropping it in the next was too
> > fast.
>
> I completely agree, and I said so at the time, but got shouted down. I
> think the argument that exclusive backups were breaking anything at
> all was very weak. Nobody was being forced to use them, and they broke
> nothing for people who didn't.
+1
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2023-10-16 18:06:01 | Re: [PATCH] Clarify the behavior of the system when approaching XID wraparound |
| Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2023-10-16 17:26:35 | Re: Improving Physical Backup/Restore within the Low Level API |