On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:11:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Chapman Flack <c...@anastigmatix.net> writes: > > On 03/30/18 16:21, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I did not like the proposed test case too much, particularly not its > >> undocumented API change for check_pg_config, > > > Other than that API change, was there something the test case could have > > done differently to make you like it more? > > Well, if that'd been properly documented I'd probably have pushed it > without complaint. But I did wonder whether it could've been folded > into one of the existing tests of pg_switch_wal(). This doesn't seem > like a property worth spending a lot of cycles on testing.
Sorry for coming in late. I have been busy doing some net-archeology to look for tools using XLP_BKP_REMOVABLE. One is pglesslog that we already know about. However I have to be honest, I have not been able to find its source code, nor have I seen another tool making use of XLP_BKP_REMOVABLE. Could we just remove the flag then? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
