| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: gitlab post-mortem: pg_basebackup waiting for checkpoint |
| Date: | 2017-02-14 23:18:24 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYeTytkZdSQqX8Ck+ZHSQkW5dyY8-0=rCdofxUbjdya_A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I'd rather have a --quiet mode instead. If you're running it by hand,
> you're likely to omit the switch, whereas when writing the cron job
> you're going to notice lack of switch even before you let the job run
> once.
Well, that might've been a better way to design it, but changing it
now would break backward compatibility and I'm not really sure that's
a good idea. Even if it is, it's a separate concern from whether or
not in the less-quiet mode we should point out that we're waiting for
a checkpoint on the server side.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-02-14 23:22:12 | Re: WAL consistency check facility |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-02-14 23:16:33 | Re: parallelize queries containing subplans |