Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think the patch is correct, but if there's any documentation of the
>> walmethod APIs that would allow one to assert which side of the API got
>> this wrong, I sure don't see it. Would it be unreasonable to insist
>> on some documentation around that?
> Would you say comments in the struct in walmethods.h is enough, or were you
> thinking actual sgml docs when you commented that?
This is just internal to pg_basebackup isn't it? I think comments in
walmethods.h would be plenty.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
