From: | Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Rename backup_label to recovery_control |
Date: | 2023-10-16 16:06:40 |
Message-ID: | 652d5f91.df0a0220.c65d7.e8f0@mx.google.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 11:15:53AM -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On 10/16/23 10:19, Robert Haas wrote:
> > We got rid of exclusive backup mode. We replaced pg_start_backup
> > with pg_backup_start.
>
> I do think this was an improvement. For example it allows us to do
> [1], which I believe is a better overall solution to the problem of
> torn reads of pg_control. With exclusive backup we would not have this
> option.
Well maybe, but it also seems to mean that any other 3rd party (i.e. not
Postgres-specific) backup tool seems to only support Postgres up till
version 14, as they cannot deal with non-exclusive mode - they are used
to a simple pre/post-script approach.
Not sure what to do about this, but as people/companies start moving to
15, I am afraid we will get people complaining about this. I think
having exclusive mode still be the default for pg_start_backup() (albeit
deprecated) in one release and then dropping it in the next was too
fast.
Or is somebody helping those "enterprise" backup solutions along in
implementing non-exclusive Postgres backups?
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2023-10-16 16:12:37 | Re: Rename backup_label to recovery_control |
Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2023-10-16 15:56:10 | Re: Fix output of zero privileges in psql |