On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
$ ./pg_archivecleanup -x "bz2" /tmp 000100010058
>>>
>>> Hmm, but I thought that the idea was that the extension was optional.
>>> Perhaps I'm missing something but
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>
>>> $ ./pg_archivecleanup -x "bz2" /tmp 000100010058
>>
>> Hmm, but I thought that the idea was that the extension was optional.
>> Perhaps I'm missing something but I don't think the previous patch
>> will complain about that eit
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jaime Casanova
>>> wrote:
> Sorry, here's the patch rebased and with the suggestion from A
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jaime Casanova
>> wrote:
Sorry, here's the patch rebased and with the suggestion from Alex.
Which reminds me, I never thank him for the revie
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jaime Casanova
>> wrote:
Sorry, here's the patch rebased and with the suggestion from Alex.
Which reminds me, I never thank him for the revie
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>>> Sorry, here's the patch rebased and with the suggestion from Alex.
>>> Which reminds me, I never thank him for the review (shame on me) :D
>>
>> with the patch this time
>
> This may be
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>> Sorry, here's the patch rebased and with the suggestion from Alex.
>> Which reminds me, I never thank him for the review (shame on me) :D
>
> with the patch this time
This may be a stupid idea, but it seems to me that it might be better
to
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>>> The smaller step of automatically stripping the specified suffix from the
>>> input file name, when it matches the one we've told
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> The smaller step of automatically stripping the specified suffix from the
>> input file name, when it matches the one we've told the program to expect,
>> seems like a usability improvement
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> The smaller step of automatically stripping the specified suffix from the
> input file name, when it matches the one we've told the program to expect,
> seems like a usability improvement unlikely to lead to bad things though.
> I've certainly
On 02/01/2012 07:53 AM, Alex Shulgin wrote:
One problem I've found while trying the example workflow is this:
~/local/postgresql/HEAD$ ./bin/pg_archivecleanup -d -x .gz data/archive/
00010002.0020.backup.gz
pg_archivecleanup: invalid filename input
Try "pg_archivecleanup --h
Hello,
This is my first patch review ever, so please bear with me.
The patch[1] is in the context diff format and applies cleanly to
current git HEAD. Documentation is updated by the patch.
The code does implement what's the patch is supposed to do.
Do we want that? According to Greg's orig
12 matches
Mail list logo
