Re: Refactoring of compression options in pg_basebackup

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Georgios Kokolatos <gkokolatos(at)pm(dot)me>
Subject: Re: Refactoring of compression options in pg_basebackup
Date: 2022-01-06 05:21:15
Message-ID: YdZ8S1AJw3n3S5YK@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 10:22:06AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think the existing precedent is to skip the test if tar isn't there,
> cf pg_basebackup/t/010_pg_basebackup.pl. But certainly the majority of
> buildfarm animals have it.

Even Windows environments should be fine, aka recent edc2332.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2022-01-06 05:35:54 Re: GUC flags
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2022-01-06 05:19:08 Re: Map WAL segment files on PMEM as WAL buffers