Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:28 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On sön, 2012-06-10 at 13:43 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> > On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Nex

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-12 Thread Thom Brown
On 11 June 2012 22:40, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On sön, 2012-06-10 at 13:43 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> > On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> >

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-11 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On sön, 2012-06-10 at 13:43 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> > On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Ne

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-11 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On sön, 2012-06-10 at 13:43 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next question is - > >> suggestions for naming of said paramter? >

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-11 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next questi

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-10 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next question is - >>> suggestions for naming of said paramter? >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-10 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next question is - >> suggestions for naming of said paramter? > > --xlog-method=something?  And/or -Xsomething, which would autom

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-06-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next question is - > suggestions for naming of said paramter? --xlog-method=something? And/or -Xsomething, which would automatically enable -x? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (p

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-05-29 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: In 9.1, the pg_basebackup option --xlog takes no argument.  In

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-05-29 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> In 9.1, the pg_basebackup option --xlog takes no argument.  In 9.2, it >>> takes a required argument.  I think such compa

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-05-29 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> In 9.1, the pg_basebackup option --xlog takes no argument.  In 9.2, it >> takes a required argument.  I think such compatibility breaks should be >> avoided, especially in client

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-05-28 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> In 9.1, the pg_basebackup option --xlog takes no argument.  In 9.2, it >> takes a required argument.  I think such compatibility breaks should be >> avoided, especially in client

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-05-28 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > In 9.1, the pg_basebackup option --xlog takes no argument.  In 9.2, it > takes a required argument.  I think such compatibility breaks should be > avoided, especially in client-side programs.  Now you can't write a > script running pg_bas

[HACKERS] pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break

2012-05-28 Thread Peter Eisentraut
In 9.1, the pg_basebackup option --xlog takes no argument. In 9.2, it takes a required argument. I think such compatibility breaks should be avoided, especially in client-side programs. Now you can't write a script running pg_basebackup that works with 9.1 and 9.2, if you need to include the WAL