On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Josh Kupershmidt <schmi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Gabriele Bartolini > <gabriele.bartol...@2ndquadrant.it> wrote: > >> My actual intention was to have the filename as output of the command, in >> order to easily "pipe" it to another script. Hence my first choice was to >> use the stdout channel, considering also that pg_archivecleanup in dry-run >> mode is harmless and does not touch the content of the directory. > > Oh, right - I should have re-read your initial email before diving > into the patch. That all makes sense given your intended purpose. I > guess your goal of constructing some simple way to pass the files > which would be removed on to another script is a little different than > what I initially thought the patch would be useful for, namely as a > testing/debugging aid for an admin. > > Perhaps both goals could be met by making use of '--debug' together > with '--dry-run'. If they are both on, then an additional message like > "pg_archivecleanup: would remove file ... " would be printed to > stderr, along with just the filename printed to stdout you already > have.
This email thread seems to have trailed off without reaching a conclusion. The patch is marked as Waiting on Author in the CommitFest application, but I'm not sure that's accurate. Can we try to nail this down? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
