| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Is anybody actually using XLR_BKP_REMOVABLE? |
| Date: | 2011-12-12 15:36:49 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKsjrkC1ezSh5sva-onQmqJ4bQ0sUAU3PrYQbCq-Coiug@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Furthermore, what the XLR_BKP_REMOVABLE bit actually reports is just
> whether a backup operation is in progress, and I think we have now (or
> easily could) add reporting records to the WAL stream that tell when a
> backup starts or stops. So external compression would still be possible
> if it kept a bit more state around.
>
> So: is there actually any such compression program out there?
> Would anybody really cry if this flag went away?
Yes, WAL records could be invented to mark the boundaries, so yes,
IMHO it is OK to make that flag go away.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-12-12 15:42:59 | Re: Is anybody actually using XLR_BKP_REMOVABLE? |
| Previous Message | Lars Kanis | 2011-12-12 15:30:48 | Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64 |