Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:57 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Given that 10 of these 11 files are new in 15, I definitely agree with > backpatching the move. OK, done. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On 2022-Aug-10, Robert Haas wrote: > David Steele voted for back-patching this on the grounds that it would > make future back-patching easier, which is an argument that seems to > me to have some merit, although on the other hand, we are already into > August so it's quite late in the day. Anyone

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On 8/10/22 12:32 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 6:20 PM Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas writes: David Steele voted for back-patching this on the grounds that it would make future back-patching easier, which is an argument that seems to me to have some merit, although on the o

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 6:20 PM Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas writes: > > David Steele voted for back-patching this on the grounds that it would > > make future back-patching easier, which is an argument that seems to > > me to have some merit, although on the other hand, we are already into >

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

Robert Haas writes: > David Steele voted for back-patching this on the grounds that it would > make future back-patching easier, which is an argument that seems to > me to have some merit, although on the other hand, we are already into > August so it's quite late in the day. Anyone else want to v

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:08:02AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 3:28 PM Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 2:40 PM Justin Pryzby wrote: > > > It looks like this updates the header comments in the .h files but not > > > the .c > > > files. > > > > > > Personally,

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 3:28 PM Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 2:40 PM Justin Pryzby wrote: > > It looks like this updates the header comments in the .h files but not the > > .c > > files. > > > > Personally, I find these to be silly boilerplate .. > > Here is a version with some upd

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 2:40 PM Justin Pryzby wrote: > It looks like this updates the header comments in the .h files but not the .c > files. > > Personally, I find these to be silly boilerplate .. Here is a version with some updates to the silly boilerplate. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enter

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On 8/9/22 14:40, Justin Pryzby wrote: On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 01:32:49PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:43 PM Magnus Hagander wrote: So maybe src/backend/backup? Or is that too grandiose for the amount of stuff we have here? +1 for src/backend/backup. I'd also be happy t

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 01:32:49PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:43 PM Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> > So maybe src/backend/backup? Or is that too grandiose for the amount > >> > of stuff we have here? > >> > >> +1 for src/backend/backup. I'd also be happy to see the start/st

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On 8/9/22 13:32, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:43 PM Magnus Hagander wrote: So maybe src/backend/backup? Or is that too grandiose for the amount of stuff we have here? +1 for src/backend/backup. I'd also be happy to see the start/stop code move here at some point. Yeah, sound

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:43 PM Magnus Hagander wrote: >> > So maybe src/backend/backup? Or is that too grandiose for the amount >> > of stuff we have here? >> >> +1 for src/backend/backup. I'd also be happy to see the start/stop code >> move here at some point. > > Yeah, sounds reasonable. There'

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 6:41 PM David Steele wrote: > On 8/9/22 12:34, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:12 PM Magnus Hagander > wrote: > > > >> Anyway, I have no objection. If there'd been that many files, or plans > to have it, in the beginning we probably would've put them in >

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On 8/9/22 12:34, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:12 PM Magnus Hagander wrote: Anyway, I have no objection. If there'd been that many files, or plans to have it, in the beginning we probably would've put them in replication/basebackup or something like that from the beginning. I'

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On 8/9/22 12:12, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 6:08 PM Robert Haas > wrote: Hi, I was thinking that it might make sense, to reduce clutter, to move *backup*.c from src/backend/replication to a new directory, perhaps src/backend/repli

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:12 PM Magnus Hagander wrote: > Those 11 files are mostly your fault, of course ;) They are. I tend to prefer smaller source files than many developers, because I find them easier to understand and maintain. If you only include in basebackup_gzip.c, then you can be prett

Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 6:08 PM Robert Haas wrote: > Hi, > > I was thinking that it might make sense, to reduce clutter, to move > *backup*.c from src/backend/replication to a new directory, perhaps > src/backend/replication/backup or src/backend/backup. > > There's no particular reason we *have*

moving basebackup code to its own directory

Hi, I was thinking that it might make sense, to reduce clutter, to move *backup*.c from src/backend/replication to a new directory, perhaps src/backend/replication/backup or src/backend/backup. There's no particular reason we *have* to do this, but there are 21 C files in that directory and 11 of