On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 3:06 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut >>> <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>>> On 7/12/16 12:53 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: >>>>> The --help message for pg_basebackup says: >>>>> >>>>> -Z, --compress=0-9 compress tar output with given compression level >>>>> >>>>> But -Z0 is then rejected as 'invalid compression level "0"'. The real >>>>> docs do say 1-9, only the --help message has this bug. Trivial patch >>>>> attached. >>>> >>>> pg_dump --help and man page say it supports 0..9. Maybe we should make >>>> that more consistent. >>> >>> pg_dump actually does support -Z0, though. Well, sort of. It outputs >>> plain text. Rather than plain text wrapped in some kind of dummy gzip >>> header, which is what I had naively expected. >>> >>> Is that what -Z0 in pg_basebackup should do as well, just output >>> uncompressed tar data, and not add the ".gz" to the "base.tar" file >>> name? >> >> Yes, I think. What about the attached patch? >> > > What if user tries to use -Z 0 with format as tar, won't it generate > base.tar without any compression?
Yes, with -Z 0 -F t options, the patched version of pg_basebackup generate base.tar without compression. > I am not sure if that is what Jeff > intends to say in his proposal. Maybe I failed to parse his proposal. It's helpful if you elaborate it. Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
