On 4/16/24 18:55, Stefan Fercot wrote:
Hi,
On Sunday, March 10th, 2024 at 4:47 AM, David Steele wrote:
I've had a new idea which may revive this patch. The basic idea is to
keep backup_label but also return a copy of pg_control from
pg_stop_backup(). This copy of pg_control would be safe from tears and
have a backupLabelRequired field set (as Andres suggested) so recovery
cannot proceed without the backup label.
So, everything will continue to work as it does now. But, backup
software can be enhanced to write the improved pg_control that is
guaranteed not to be torn and has protection against a missing backup label.
Of course, pg_basebackup will write the new backupLabelRequired field
into pg_control, but this way third party software can also gain
advantages from the new field.
Bump on this idea.
Given the discussion in [1], even if it obviously makes sense to improve the in
core backup capabilities, the more we go in that direction, the more we'll rely
on outside orchestration.
So IMHO it also worth worrying about given more leverage to such orchestration
tools. In that sense, I really like the idea to extend the backup functions.
I have implemented this idea and created a new thread [1] for it.
Hopefully it will address the concerns expressed in this thread.
Regards,
-David
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/e2636c5d-c031-43c9-a5d6-5e5c7e4c5514%40pgmasters.net
