| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: trying again to get incremental backup |
| Date: | 2023-10-25 15:24:25 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZbOjXCh+z4TvPVJM2RX0eWLKnbB3R+MYf2UNtRqnLnSw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 10:33 AM Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> I'm not too worried about the maintenance burden.
>
> That said, I agree that JSON might not be the best format for backup
> manifests, but maybe that ship has sailed.
I think it's a decision we could walk back if we had a good enough
reason, but it would be nicer if we didn't have to, because what we
have right now is working. If we change it for no real reason, we
might introduce new bugs, and at least in theory, incompatibility with
third-party tools that parse the existing format. If you think we can
live with the additional complexity in the JSON parsing stuff, I'd
rather go that way.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jelte Fennema | 2023-10-25 15:34:54 | Re: libpq async connection and multiple hosts |
| Previous Message | Drouvot, Bertrand | 2023-10-25 15:19:54 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |