Horton

Re: block-level incremental backup

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

View thread
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-04-18T15:34:32Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Don't call data type input functions in GUC check hooks

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 05:32:57PM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:57:35AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Also, instead of storing the file name and block number in the modblock
> > file, using the database oid, relfilenode, and block number (3 int32
> > values) should be sufficient.
> 
> Would doing it that way constrain the design of new table access
> methods in some meaningful way?

I think these are the values used in WAL, so I assume table access
methods already have to map to those, unless they use their own.
I actually don't know.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +