Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Make pg_stop_backup() archive wait optional - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Make pg_stop_backup() archive wait optional
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZfjF2k6N8Rfga20bXxnRAttuz8N6dvxeOu=t3j0FYYsg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Make pg_stop_backup() archive wait optional  (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Make pg_stop_backup() archive wait optional  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Make pg_stop_backup() archive wait optional  (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 9:12 AM, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> Yes, that makes sense.  Attached are two patches as requested:
>
> 01 - Just marks pg_stop_backup() variants as parallel restricted
> 02 - Add the wait_for_archive param to pg_stop_backup().
>
> These apply cleanly on 272adf4.

Committed 01.  Nobody's offered an opinion about 02 yet, so I'm not
going to commit that, but one minor nitpick:

+    WAL to be archived.  This behavior is only useful for backup
+    software which independently monitors WAL archiving, otherwise WAL
+    required to make the backup consistent might be missing and make the backup

I think this should really say "...which independently monitors WAL
archiving.  Otherwise, WAL..."

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: two slab-like memory allocators
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Make pg_stop_backup() archive wait optional