From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_basebackup --xlog compatibility break |
Date: | 2012-06-12 09:47:24 |
Message-ID: | CAA-aLv7x4Xcsd4tvhMPk-GaiVEYYsBieT_9G_BF4+LkANfBYzg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11 June 2012 22:40, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> On sön, 2012-06-10 at 13:43 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>>> > On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> >> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next question is -
>>> >> suggestions for naming of said paramter?
>>> >
>>> > --xlog-method=something? And/or -Xsomething, which would automatically
>>> > enable -x?
>>>
>>> How's this?
>>
>> I wouldn't make -x and -X exclusive. The way I understood this is, -x
>> means include xlog, and -X says how to.
>>
>> I guess either way of looking at it has its merits.
>
> I guess it's basically two ways of doing the same thing. I'm not
> especially attached to either one of them, so if you think the ohter
> one is better, I won't object to changing it.
+1 for not telling the user off for being explicit by stating both options.
--
Thom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nikhil Sontakke | 2012-06-12 11:18:45 | xml_is_document and selective pg_re_throw |
Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2012-06-12 08:54:25 | Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas |