Re: confusing archive_command example - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: confusing archive_command example
Date
Msg-id 201003312351.o2VNpFd25456@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: confusing archive_command example  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: confusing archive_command example  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: confusing archive_command example  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-docs
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > What about:
> >      archive_command = 'test ! -f ...%f && cp %p ...%f'
>
> Perhaps, though I still think this isn't an improvement over the
> original.

His complaint was that .../%f looks like ../%f;  is that a valid
concern?  I have reverted the change.  Also, should we be using test !
-e instead of -f?

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: confusing archive_command example
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: confusing archive_command example