From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups |
Date: | 2011-01-20 01:33:04 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTik57EM-B709WK6TLHJuRwdFSPmFjWFLDmv+W03j@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> The "fast or slow" seems to lead users to always choose "fast". Instead,
>> what about "fast or smooth", "fast or spread" or "immediate or delayed"?
>
> Hmm. "fast or spread" seems reasonable to me. And I want to use "fast"
> for the fast version, because that's what we call it when you use
> pg_start_backup(). I'll go change it to spread for now - it's the one
> I can find used in the docs.
Fair enough.
>> What if pg_basebackup receives a signal while doing a backup?
>> For example, users might do Ctrl-C to cancel the long-running backup.
>> We should define a signal handler and send a Terminate message
>> to the server to cancel the backup?
>
> Nah, we'll just disconnect and it'll deal with things that way. Just
> like we do with e.g. pg_dump. I don't see the need to complicate it
> with that.
Okay.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-01-20 01:34:00 | Re: SSI and Hot Standby |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-01-20 01:21:14 | Re: SSI and Hot Standby |