Re: refactoring basebackup.c

At 2022-02-02 10:55:53 -0500, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 1:55 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > 0001 adds "server" and "blackhole" as backup targets. It now has some
> > tests. This might be more or less ready to ship, unless somebody else
> > sees a problem, or I find one.
>
> I played around with this a bit and it seems quite easy to extend this
> further. So please find attached a couple more patches to generalize
> this mechanism.

It took me a while to assimilate these patches, including the backup
targets one, which I hadn't looked at before. Now that I've wrapped my
head around how to put the pieces together, I really like the idea. As
you say, writing non-trivial integrations in C will take some effort,
but it seems worthwhile. It's also nice that one can continue to use
pg_basebackup to trigger the backups and see progress information.

> Granted, coding up a new base backup target is
> something only experienced C hackers are likely to do, but the fact
> that I was able to throw this together so quickly suggests to me that
> I've got the design basically right, and that anyone who does want to
> plug into the new mechanism shouldn't have too much trouble doing so.
>
> Thoughts?

Yes, it looks simple to follow the example set by basebackup_to_shell to
write a custom target. The complexity will be in whatever we need to do
to store/forward the backup data, rather than in obtaining the data in
the first place, which is exactly as it should be.

Thanks!

-- Abhijit