On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 06:09:13PM +0300, Максим Яблоков wrote:
>> I have prepared a small patch with possible changes of these places, and
>> also a separate patch with some improvements concerning missed/inapt tags.
>> Please have a look.
> archive_command is used only when archive_library is not set AFAIK,
> but an archive_library could also freely use an archive_command if it
> wishes to. But, yes, I agree that the current wording in backup.sgml
> is kind of confusing because of this reason, so I am fine to have a
> reference to both archive_library *and* archive_command in this area
> of the docs.
>
> All WAL records required for the backup must contain sufficient full-page writes,
> which requires you to enable <varname>full_page_writes</varname> on the primary and
> - not to use a tool in your <varname>archive_library</varname> to remove
> - full-page writes from WAL files.
> + not to use a tool to remove full-page writes from WAL files.
>
> Hmm. My opinion here is to do a simplification, and remove simply the
> last part of the paragraph about tools that manipulate WAL files
> as the first sentence makes it clear, in my opinion, that if those
> FPWs are not around the server could become kaput.
Thanks, new patch is attached.
> Most of the changes in PGSQL15_tags_fix.patch seem right to me.
> Still, you'd better check that the docs compile, as of:
>
>> --- a/doc/src/sgml/basebackup-to-shell.sgml
>> +++ b/doc/src/sgml/basebackup-to-shell.sgml
>> @@ -12,9 +12,9 @@
>> called <literal>shell</literal>. This makes it possible to run
>> <literal>pg_basebackup --target=shell</literal> or, depending on how this
>> module is configured,
>> - <literal>pg_basebackup --target=shell:DETAIL_STRING</literal>, and cause
>> - a server command chosen by the server administrator to be executed for
>> - each tar archive generated by the backup process. The command will receive
>> + <literal>pg_basebackup --target=shell:<replaceable>DETAIL_STRING<replaceable></literal>,
> I am pretty sure that this line is going to cause a compilation
> failure of the docs. Anyway, this should be use a <command> markup,
> no?
Yeah, sorry about that, I fixed it in the new patch.
As for the <command> tag, it is written above:
<literal>pg_basebackup --target=shell</literal>
And also in backup.sgml there is the following:
<literal>createdb -T template0 <replaceable
class="parameter">dbname</replaceable></literal>
So I believe that we can keep <literal> here.
Thanks a lot!
> --
> Michael
--
Best regards,
Maxim Yablokov
Technical writer-translator
Postgres Professional <https://postgrespro.com/>