On 06/10/2015 10:22 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote:
On 06/10/2015 10:01 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-06-10 09:57:17 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
Mine goal isn't that. My goal is to have a consistent backup without
having to shut down the server to take a cold one, or having to manually
juggle the pg_start_backup, etc. commands.
A basebackup won't necessarily give you a consistent log though...
I am -1 on this idea. It just doesn't seem to make sense. There are too many
variables where it won't work or won't be relevant.
I'm not clear on which of these options you are voting for:
(1) include pg_log in pg_basebackup as we do currently
(2) exclude it
(3) add a switch controlling whether or not it gets excluded
I can live with (3), but I bet most people want (2).
Sorry I wasn't clear. #2
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
