On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> > wrote: > >> So - I can definitely see the argument for returning the stop wal >> *location*. But I'm still not sure what the definition of the time would >> be? We can't return it before we know what it means... >> > > > I had a chat with Heikki, and here's another suggestion: > > 1. We don't touch the current exclusive backups at all, as previously > discussed, other than deprecating their use. For backwards compat. > > 2. For new backups, we return the contents of pg_control as a bytea from > pg_stop_backup(). We tell backup programs they are supposed to write this > out as pg_control.backup, *not* as pg_control. > > 3a. On recovery, if it's an exlcusive backup, we do as we did before. > > 3b. on recovery, in non-exclusive backups (determined from backup_label), > we check that pg_control.backup exists *and* that pg_control does *not* > exist. > Currently pg_control has been read before backup_label file, so as per this proposal do you want to change that? If yes, I think that will make this patch more invasive with respect to handling of failure modes. Also as David points out, I also feel that it will raise the bar for usage of this API. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
