| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Roles for pg_basebackup |
| Date: | 2020-04-28 05:22:03 |
| Message-ID: | b11cc8df-c4c3-5b19-995e-2a9853720bea@oss.nttdata.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On 2020/04/28 13:37, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:16:41PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Based on a recent conversation about backups I had I propose a small tweak to
>> the pg_basebackup documentation. Listing the user types in the reverse order
>> from today, putting superuser last, makes it IMO a little clearer that a
>> REPLICATION role is preferrable to using a superuser for running backups.
>
> Makes sense to me. We do that in logical-replication.sgml as well as
> pg_rewind.sgml (the latter outlines superuser rights last).
Seems there are other documentations having the similar description,
for example, pg_receivewal.sgml, func.sgml and high-availability.sgml.
Isn't it better to update also them at the same time?
> Any objections from others?
No.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2020-04-28 08:15:36 | Re: Roles for pg_basebackup |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-04-28 04:37:55 | Re: Roles for pg_basebackup |