On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 8:46 PM Chris Travers
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 4:09 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 09:00:57PM +0800, Chris Travers wrote:
> >> > I also added test cases and some docs. I don't know
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 8:46 PM Chris Travers wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 4:09 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 09:00:57PM +0800, Chris Travers wrote:
>> > I also added test cases and some docs. I don't know if the docs are
>> > sufficient. Feedback is appreciated.
>>
>
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 4:09 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 09:00:57PM +0800, Chris Travers wrote:
> > I also added test cases and some docs. I don't know if the docs are
> > sufficient. Feedback is appreciated.
>
> To be honest, I don't think that this approach is a good i
Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 09:00:57PM +0800, Chris Travers wrote:
> > I also added test cases and some docs. I don't know if the docs are
> > sufficient. Feedback is appreciated.
>
> To be honest, I don't think that this approach is a goo
On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 09:00:57PM +0800, Chris Travers wrote:
> I also added test cases and some docs. I don't know if the docs are
> sufficient. Feedback is appreciated.
To be honest, I don't think that this approach is a good idea per the
same reasons as mentioned the last time, as this can c
Hi;
Attached is my second attempt at the pg_rewind change which allows one to
include only a minimal set. To my understanding, all past feedback has
been addressed.
The current patch does not change default behavior at present. It does add
a --data-only flag which allows pg_rewind to only rewin
