Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups
Date: 2011-01-18 12:32:07
Message-ID: AANLkTinxhJDhs75qf3fgetbe0U46WiZn9PpuQGtmup0H@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 16:27, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 16:20 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 16:18, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> >> Hmm. I don't like those names at all :(
>> >
>> > I agree.  I don't think your original names are bad, as long as
>> > they're well-documented.  I sympathize with Simon's desire to make it
>> > clear that these use the replication framework, but I really don't
>> > want the command names to be that long.
>>
>> Actually, after some IM chats, I think pg_streamrecv should be
>> renamed, probably to pg_walstream (or pg_logstream, but pg_walstream
>> is a lot more specific than that)
>
> pg_stream_log
> pg_stream_backup

Those seem better.

Tom, would those solve your concerns about it being clear which side
they are on? Or do you think you'd still risk reading them as the
sending side?

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2011-01-18 13:11:33 Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2011-01-18 12:29:45 Re: REVIEW: Extensions support for pg_dump