Re: .backup files not needed?

On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 10:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Just had questions from a replication user about why the .backup file is
> > described as "can ordinarily be ignored" and is considered optional by
> > recovery also even when pg_start_backup() was used.
>
> What it says is that the second part of the filename can ordinarily
> be ignored. I don't know why neither he nor you managed to parse the
> sentence correctly. Feel free to propose a rewording, but removing
> information doesn't sound like a solution.

Its probably best to read the whole mail before commenting on other
people's parsing. ;-)

I'll do a patch.

--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com