From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: fix tablespace handling in pg_combinebackup |
Date: | 2024-04-17 21:50:21 |
Message-ID: | 20240417215021.enskzosiptctoibs@awork3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2024-04-17 16:16:55 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> In the "Differential code coverage between 16 and HEAD" thread, Andres
> pointed out that there wasn't test case coverage for
> pg_combinebackup's code to handle files in tablespaces. I looked at
> adding that, and as nobody could possibly have predicted, found a bug.
Ha ;)
> @@ -787,8 +787,13 @@ Does not start the node after initializing it.
>
> By default, the backup is assumed to be plain format. To restore from
> a tar-format backup, pass the name of the tar program to use in the
> -keyword parameter tar_program. Note that tablespace tar files aren't
> -handled here.
> +keyword parameter tar_program.
> +
> +If there are tablespace present in the backup, include tablespace_map as
> +a keyword parameter whose values is a hash. When tar_program is used, the
> +hash keys are tablespace OIDs; otherwise, they are the tablespace pathnames
> +used in the backup. In either case, the values are the tablespace pathnames
> +that should be used for the target cluster.
Where would one get these oids?
Could some of this be simplified by using allow_in_place_tablespaces instead?
Looks like it'd simplify at least the extended test somewhat?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2024-04-17 23:00:02 | Re: pgsql: meson: Add initial version of meson based build system |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-04-17 21:39:53 | plenty code is confused about function level static |