Re: Patch: incorrect array offset in backend replication tar header
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch: incorrect array offset in backend replication tar header |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18775.1348583459@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch: incorrect array offset in backend replication tar header (Brian Weaver <cmdrclueless@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch: incorrect array offset in backend replication
tar header
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Brian Weaver <cmdrclueless@gmail.com> writes: > If you're willing to wait a bit on me to code and test my extensions > to pg_basebackup I will try to address some of the deficiencies as > well add new features. I think it's a mistake to try to handle these issues in the same patch as feature extensions. If you want to submit a patch for them, I'm happy to let you do the legwork, but please keep it narrowly focused on fixing file-format deficiencies. The notes I had last night after examining pg_dump were: magic number written incorrectly, but POSIX fields aren't filled anyway (which is why tar tvf doesn't show them) checksum code is brain-dead; no use in "lastSum" nor in looping per spec, there should be 1024 zeroes not 512 at end of file; this explains why tar whines about a "lone zero block" ... Not sure which of these apply to pg_basebackup. As far as the backwards compatibility issue goes, what seems like a good idea after sleeping on it is (1) fix pg_dump in HEAD to emit standard-compliant tar files; (2) fix pg_restore in HEAD and all back branches to accept both the standard and the incorrect magic field. This way, the only people with a compatibility problem would be those trying to use by-then-ancient pg_restore versions to read 9.3 or later pg_dump output. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: