On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 08:09:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:04:20PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> I agree, I think forcing users to specify --no-manifest when run on old
>>> servers will cause users to write bad scripts; I vote for silently
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:04:20PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I agree, I think forcing users to specify --no-manifest when run on old
>> servers will cause users to write bad scripts; I vote for silently
>> disabling checksums.
> Okay, thanks. Are there any other o
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:04:20PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I agree, I think forcing users to specify --no-manifest when run on old
> servers will cause users to write bad scripts; I vote for silently
> disabling checksums.
Okay, thanks. Are there any other opinions?
--
Michael
signature.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:13:39PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Feel free to go ahead.
Thanks, let's do it then. If you have any objections about any parts
of the patch, of course please feel free.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 8:23 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:55:07PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Oh, hmm. Maybe I'm getting confused with a previous version of the
> > patch that behaved differently.
>
> No problem. If you prefer keeping this part of the code, that's fine
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:55:07PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Oh, hmm. Maybe I'm getting confused with a previous version of the
> patch that behaved differently.
No problem. If you prefer keeping this part of the code, that's fine
by me. If you think that the patch is suited as-is, including
s
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 6:26 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> Well, the documentation tells me that as of protocol.sgml:
> "For compatibility with previous releases, the default is
> MANIFEST 'no'."
>
> The code also tells me that, in line with the docs:
> static void
> parse_basebackup_options(List *o
On 2020-Apr-13, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:52:51AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > Since I'm not sure about the work flow that contains taking a
> > basebackup from a server of a different version, I'm not sure which is
> > better between silently disabling and errorin
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:13:06AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think that this patch is incorrect. I have no objection to
> introducing MINIMUM_VERSION_FOR_MANIFESTS, but this is not OK:
>
> - else
> - {
> - if (serverMajor < 1300)
> - manifest_clause = "";
> - else
> - manifest_clause = "MANIFE
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 8:56 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 08:08:17AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Exactly. My point is exactly that. The current code would force
> > users maintaining scripts with pg_basebackup to use --no-manifest if
> > such a script runs with older
At Mon, 13 Apr 2020 13:51:07 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:52:51AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > Since I'm not sure about the work flow that contains taking a
> > basebackup from a server of a different version, I'm not sure which is
> > better between silent
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:52:51AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Since I'm not sure about the work flow that contains taking a
> basebackup from a server of a different version, I'm not sure which is
> better between silently disabling and erroring out. However, it seems
> to me, the option fo
At Mon, 13 Apr 2020 09:56:02 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 08:08:17AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Exactly. My point is exactly that. The current code would force
> > users maintaining scripts with pg_basebackup to use --no-manifest if
> > such a script runs wi
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 08:08:17AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Exactly. My point is exactly that. The current code would force
> users maintaining scripts with pg_basebackup to use --no-manifest if
> such a script runs with older versions of Postgres, but we should
> encourage users not do to
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 04:44:34PM -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On 4/10/20 4:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> It's only the default in v13.. Surely when we connect to a v12 or
>> earlier system we should just keep working and accept that we don't get
>> a manifest as part of that.
>
> Yeah, OK. It'
Hi,
On 2020-04-10 16:32:08 -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On 4/10/20 4:09 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > I have noticed that attempting to use pg_basebackup from HEAD leads to
> > failures when using it with backend versions from 12 and older:
> > $ pg_basebackup -D hoge
> > pg_basebackup: erro
On 4/10/20 4:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
Greetings,
* David Steele (da...@pgmasters.net) wrote:
On 4/10/20 4:09 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
I have noticed that attempting to use pg_basebackup from HEAD leads to
failures when using it with backend versions from 12 and older:
$ pg_basebackup -D h
Greetings,
* David Steele (da...@pgmasters.net) wrote:
> On 4/10/20 4:09 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >I have noticed that attempting to use pg_basebackup from HEAD leads to
> >failures when using it with backend versions from 12 and older:
> >$ pg_basebackup -D hoge
> >pg_basebackup: error: backu
On 4/10/20 4:09 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
I have noticed that attempting to use pg_basebackup from HEAD leads to
failures when using it with backend versions from 12 and older:
$ pg_basebackup -D hoge
pg_basebackup: error: backup manifests are not supported by server
version 12beta2
pg_baseback
Hi,
I have noticed that attempting to use pg_basebackup from HEAD leads to
failures when using it with backend versions from 12 and older:
$ pg_basebackup -D hoge
pg_basebackup: error: backup manifests are not supported by server
version 12beta2
pg_basebackup: removing data directory "hoge"
This
20 matches
Mail list logo
