On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 03:14, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >>> + printf(_(" -D, --pgdata=directory receive base backup into >>> directory\n")); >>> + printf(_(" -T, --tardir=directory receive base backup into tar >>> files\n" >>> + " stored in specified >>> directory\n")); >>> + printf(_(" -Z, --compress=0-9 compress tar output\n")); >>> + printf(_(" -l, --label=label set backup label\n")); >>> + printf(_(" -p, --progress show progress >>> information\n")); >>> + printf(_(" -v, --verbose output verbose messages\n")); >>> >>> Can we list those options in alphabetical order as other tools do? >> >> Certainly. But it makes more sense to have -D and -T next to each >> other, I think - they'd end up way elsewhere. Perhaps we need a group >> taht says "target"? > > I agree with you if we end up choosing -D and -T for a target rather > than pg_dump-like options I proposed.
Yeah. What do others think between tohse two options? -D/-T followed by directory, or -D <dir> and -F<format>? >> Requiring PQfinish() might be more reasonable since it will give you a >> log on the server if you don't, but I'm not convinced that's necessary >> either? > > At least it's required for each password-retry. Otherwise, previous > connections remain during backup. You can see this problem easily Oh yeah, I've put that one in my git branch already. > by repeating the password input in pg_basebackup. > > LOG: could not send data to client: Connection reset by peer > LOG: could not send data to client: Broken pipe > FATAL: base backup could not send data, aborting backup > > As you said, if PQfinish is not called at exit(1), the above messages > would be output. Those messages look ugly and should be > suppressed whenever we *can*. Also I believe other tools would > do that. Yeah, agreed. I'll add that, shouldn't be too hard. >>> + keywords[2] = "fallback_application_name"; >>> + values[2] = "pg_basebackup"; >>> >>> Using the progname variable seems better rather than the fixed word >>> "pg_basebackup". >> >> I don't think so - that turns into argv[0], which means that if you >> use the full path of the program (/usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_basebackup >> for example), the entire path goes into fallback_application_name - >> not just the program name. > > No. get_progname extracts the actual name. Hmm. I see it does. I wonder what I did to make that not work. Then I agree with the change :-) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers