From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: should pg_basebackup be listed as a server application? |
Date: | 2011-05-06 17:30:27 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTikMnvvYrG6GS_pLvL8p+P6hwG3_Fg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 19:18, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> The pg_basebackup reference page is currently under "Client
> Applications" [0]. I think it's more of a server application, because
> it's what you'd run instead of initdb on the server. Should it be moved
> to the "Server Applications" section?
Not sure I buy that argument. pg_dump/pg_dumpall/pg_restore are under
client applications. They're something you run *alongside* initdb and
not instead, sure.. But they're all backup tools.
And normally you *don't* necessarily run pg_basebackup instead of
initdb. That is just one usecase - the one of setting up a clone or a
replication slave. If you're using it to just take a base backup
(which is what it's named for), it's not done instead of initdb...
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-05-06 18:30:04 | Re: should pg_basebackup be listed as a server application? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2011-05-06 17:18:19 | should pg_basebackup be listed as a server application? |