From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Remove Deprecated Exclusive Backup Mode |
Date: | 2018-11-27 08:33:30 |
Message-ID: | CABUevExaG3N-cq5TkOeuRtwvCpXvmkeUhd92wqPz0ihXtC+mpg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 4:46 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-11-27 12:20:13 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:13:34PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
> > > Non-exclusive backups have been available since 9.6 and several
> third-party
> > > solutions support this mode, in addition to pg_basebackup.
> >
> > I think that two releases is not actually that much time to just nuke
> > the exclusive backup interface. I would be fine if the docs show the
> > deprecation more aggressively using a warning section, and we could add
> > an explicit WARNING message about the matter directly when calling
> > pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup.
>
> That was my gut reaction as well, but I think David's argument about
> existing scripts / workflows being broken due the the recovery.conf
> is a good reason to be more aggressive here.
>
Yeah, I'm in the same boat here -- it feels like it's a bit too short, but
since we're breaking things for people *anyway*, it's probably better to
break both at once than to have all those people have their things broken
multiple times.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ideriha, Takeshi | 2018-11-27 08:55:41 | RE: Protect syscache from bloating with negative cache entries |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-11-27 08:26:55 | Re: pg11.1 jit segv |