| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Changes to backup.sgml |
| Date: | 2015-05-15 17:03:59 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmob91VkJMkB2wtZfChk5Tp-D1Oba3htLFKB5cH3J_HTM2g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> 1. File System Level Backup
>
> The section should be a note within the larger document. It is largely a
> legacy section from before 8.3.
I agree. I think this section is just plain weird at this point.
Most people would assume that you can copy or move the database files
when the database server is shut down, but few people would consider
that a usable backup strategy. I'm not sure exactly how this should
be refactored, but I think something should be done. Maybe the title
should be something like "Moving or Copying Database Files" instead of
"File System Level Backup", and the content could be adjusted to fit
that theme.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-15 17:09:03 | Re: WALWriteLock contention |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2015-05-15 16:53:28 | Re: WALWriteLock contention |