On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 19:52, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On sön, 2012-01-08 at 22:22 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 21:53, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: >> > I've recently had a possible need for telling pg_basebackup how to >> > handle symlinks in the remote data directory, instead of ignoring them, >> > which is what currently happens. Possible options were recreating the >> > symlink locally (pointing to a file on the local system) or copying the >> > file the symlink points to. This is mainly useful in scenarios where >> > configuration files are symlinked from the data directory. Has anyone >> > else had the need for this? Is it worth pursuing? >> >> Yes. >> >> I came up to the same issue though - in one case it would've been best >> to copy the link, in the other case it would've been best to copy the >> contents of the file :S Couldn't decide which was most important... >> Maybe a switch would be needed? > > Yes. Do we need to preserve the third behavior of ignoring symlinks?
I don't think we do. > tar has an -h option that causes symlinks to be followed. The default > there is to archive the symlink itself. Seems like a reasonable pattern to follow (though I think using -h is a really bad idea, but the pattern of by default archiving the symlink itself) -- 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
