On 12/31/19 10:43 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 01:30:01PM +0100, Tels wrote:
>> Moin,
>>
>> sorry for the very late reply. There was a discussion about the specific
>> format of the backup manifests, and maybe that was already discussed and I
>> just overlooked it:
>>
>> 1) Why invent your own format, and not just use a machine-readable format
>> that already exists? It doesn't have to be full blown XML, or even JSON,
>> something simple as YAML would already be better. That way not everyone has
>> to write their own parser. Or maybe it is already YAML and just the
>> different keywords where under discussion?
>
> YAML is extremely fragile and error-prone. It's also a superset of
> JSON, so I don't understand what you mean by "as simple as."
>
> -1 from me on YAML
-1 from me as well. YAML is easy to write but definitely non-trivial to
read.
> That said, I agree that there's no reason to come up with a bespoke
> format and parser when JSON is already available in every PostgreSQL
> installation. Imposing a structure atop that includes a version
> number, as you suggest, seems pretty straightforward, and should be
> done.
+1. I continue to support a format that would be easily readable
without writing a lot of code.
--
-David
david@pgmasters.net
