From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | jim(at)jdoherty(dot)net, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Another pg_dump using split and gzip for large databases |
Date: | 2021-07-29 17:15:21 |
Message-ID: | 04E6A89E-19FC-4181-9D95-96B71482944F@yesql.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
> On 29 Jul 2021, at 17:29, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 05:23:20PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 29 Jul 2021, at 16:58, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>>
>>> OK, I can adjust it to say "GNU split" or just skip this addition.
>>
>> I don't have strong feelings either way, with a slight preference for writing
>> it as "GNU split" since it's still a good tip for a large amount of readers.
>
> Yes, I am on the fence for the same reasons but lean toward moving
> forward for your same reasons.
Making it two separate examples is a good idea, tipping the scale to a +1 from me.
+ If using <application>GNU split</application>, it is possible to
A small nitpick is that we write this as GNU <application>..</application>
elsewhere on this page (like GNU tar for example).
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-07-29 19:10:34 | Re: Another pg_dump using split and gzip for large databases |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-07-29 15:29:25 | Re: Another pg_dump using split and gzip for large databases |