From: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: cleanup patches for incremental backup |
Date: | 2024-01-16 20:22:15 |
Message-ID: | CAEze2WizrxyWg+xeVMuyVqfZc-8U1myy1V4H3zwV-7xXztVf2w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 at 16:39, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 3:31 PM Matthias van de Meent
> <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Off-list I was notified that the new WAL summarizer process was not
> > yet added to the glossary, so PFA a patch that does that.
> > In passing, it also adds "incremental backup" to the glossary, and
> > updates the documented types of backends in monitoring.sgml with the
> > new backend type, too.
>
> I wonder if it's possible that you sent the wrong version of this
> patch, because:
>
> (1) The docs don't build with this applied. I'm not sure if it's the
> only problem, but <glossterm linkend="glossary-db-cluster" is missing
> the closing >.
That's my mistake, I didn't check install-world yet due to unrelated
issues building the docs. I've since sorted out these issues (this was
a good stick to get that done), so this issue is fixed in the attached
patch.
> (2) The changes to monitoring.sgml contain an unrelated change, about
> pg_stat_all_indexes.idx_scan.
Thanks for noticing, fixed in attached.
> Also, I think the "For more information, see <xref linkend="whatever"
> /> bit should have a period after the markup tag, as we seem to do in
> other cases.
Fixed.
> One other thought is that the incremental backup only replaces
> relation files with incremental files, and it never does anything
> about FSM files. So the statement that it only contains data that was
> potentially changed isn't quite correct. It might be better to phrase
> it the other way around i.e. it is like a full backup, except that
> some files can be replaced by incremental files which omit blocks to
> which no WAL-logged changes have been made.
How about the attached?
Kind regards,
Matthias van de Meent
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-incremental-backups-Add-new-items-to-glossary-mon.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ranier Vilela | 2024-01-16 20:25:39 | Re: Fix a possible socket leak at Windows (src/backend/port/win32/socket.c) |
Previous Message | Przemysław Sztoch | 2024-01-16 20:20:58 | Re: UUID v7 |