| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect |
| Date: | 2018-04-30 01:20:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WznhqYPb_=_wwSHRWPtvSkvNXbwRfS2x5j5oAsT_PfXuRg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 9:58 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Hm, the docs about taking backups with the low-level APIs don't care
> much about relkind now:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/continuous-archiving.html#BACKUP-LOWLEVEL-BASE-BACKUP
> Or do you have another section in the docs in mind?
No, I didn't. We should definitely document new relkinds in the
pg_class docs, though.
> Does the attached patch address everything you have seen?
What about amcheck? I did change the example query in the docs to
account for this, so anyone that generalizes from that won't have a
problem, but it would be nice if it had a friendlier message. I didn't
change amcheck to account for this myself because I thought it was
possible that somebody else would want to use a more general solution.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yuriy Zhuravlev | 2018-04-30 01:55:46 | Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-04-30 01:09:29 | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |