| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Use of backup_label not noted in log |
| Date: | 2023-11-21 03:54:36 |
| Message-ID: | ZVwp_G70oakgwQiL@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 03:31:20PM -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On 11/20/23 15:03, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Besides the phrasing and the additional log message (I have no opinion about
>> whether it should be backpatched or not), I used %u for TimelineID as
>> appropriate, and added a comma before "on timeline".
The "starting/restarting/completed recovery" line sounds better here,
so I'm OK with your suggestions.
> I still wonder if we need "base backup" in the messages? That sort of
> implies (at least to me) you used pg_basebackup but that may not be the
> case.
Or just s/base backup/backup/?
> Other than that, looks good for HEAD. Whether we back patch or not is
> another question, of course.
I'd rather see more information in the back-branches more quickly, so
count me in the bucket of folks in favor of a backpatch.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adam Hendel | 2023-11-21 04:22:21 | Re: [PATCH] pgbench log file headers |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2023-11-21 03:52:35 | Re: remaining sql/json patches |