Greetings, * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:29 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > Agreed. I don't think three modes would help anyone. > > Well, I think that if and when we remove the existing exclusive mode, > we're going to break a bunch of people's backup scripts. I think it's > appropriate to do that eventually, but I'm not in a big rush. Long > deprecation periods are a feature, not a bug.
This is pretty tangential to the overall discussion, but I generally disagree that deprecation periods beyond what we already, always, provide thanks to supporting 5 major versions concurrently are actually a feature or are healthy for the project. I continue to find it curious that we stress a great deal over (very likely) poorly written backup scripts that haven't been updated in the 5+? years since exclusive mode was deprecated, but we happily add new keywords in new major versions and remove columns in our catalog tables or rename columns or entirely redo how recovery works (breaking every script out there that performed a restore..) or do any number of other things that potentially break applications that communicate through the PG protocol and other parts of the system that very likely have scripts that were written to work with them. I'm really of the opinion that we need to stop doing that. If someone could explain what is so special about *this* part of the system that we absolutely can't possibly accept any change that might break user's scripts, and why it's worth all of the angst, maintenance, ridiculously difficult documentation to understand and hacks (the interface to pg_start_backup is ridiculously warty because of this), I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature