Re: [HACKERS] Timeline ID in backup_label file
От | David Steele |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Timeline ID in backup_label file |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1372088e-08bc-65bb-9903-a2f33169e470@pgmasters.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Timeline ID in backup_label file (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Timeline ID in backup_label file
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/27/17 7:11 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:06 PM, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote: >> On 11/15/17 10:09 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> >>> read_backup_label() is a static function in the backend code. With #2 >>> I do not imply to change the order of the elements written in the >>> backup_label file, just to make the way they are parsed smarter. >> >> My point is that the order *could* be changed and it wouldn't be noticed >> if the read function were improved as you propose. >> >> I'm not against the idea, just think we should continue to enforce the >> order unless we decide an interface break is OK. > > I still don't quite understand here. The order the items are read does > not cause a backward-incompatible change. True that there is no reason > to change that either now. Perhaps I'm the one who is misunderstanding. If you propose a patch I'll be happy to review it, though I doubt there is a lot to be gained even if it would be a better implementation. Regards, -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: