Re: backup manifests
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Try to avoid compiler warnings in optimized builds.
- 05021a2c0cd2 13.0 landed
-
Fix option related issues in pg_verifybackup.
- 0a89e93bfaa6 13.0 landed
-
Add index term for backup manifest in documentation.
- 4db819ba4039 13.0 landed
-
Code review for backup manifest.
- a2ac73e7be7a 13.0 landed
-
Document the backup manifest file format.
- 149f2ae88ab0 13.0 landed
-
Fix typo in pg_validatebackup documentation.
- c4f82a779d26 13.0 landed
-
Exclude backup_manifest file that existed in database, from BASE_BACKUP.
- 1ec50a81ec0a 13.0 landed
-
Msys2 tweaks for pg_validatebackup corruption test
- c3e4cbaab936 13.0 landed
-
Fix resource management bug with replication=database.
- 3e0d80fd8d3d 13.0 cited
-
Be more careful about time_t vs. pg_time_t in basebackup.c.
- db1531cae009 13.0 cited
-
pg_validatebackup: Fix 'make clean' to remove tmp_check.
- 9f8f881caa0f 13.0 landed
-
pg_validatebackup: Also use perl2host in TAP tests.
- 460314db08e8 13.0 landed
-
Generate backup manifests for base backups, and validate them.
- 0d8c9c1210c4 13.0 landed
-
Add checksum helper functions.
- c12e43a2e0d4 13.0 landed
-
pg_waldump: Add a --quiet option.
- ac44367efbef 13.0 landed
-
Catversion bump for b9b408c48724
- afb5465e0cfc 13.0 cited
-
pg_basebackup: Refactor code for reading COPY and tar data.
- 431ba7bebf13 13.0 landed
-
Use a ResourceOwner to track buffer pins in all cases.
- 3cb646264e8c 12.0 cited
-
Use ARMv8 CRC instructions where available.
- f044d71e331d 11.0 cited
-
Logical replication support for initial data copy
- 7c4f52409a8c 10.0 cited
-
Use Intel SSE 4.2 CRC instructions where available.
- 3dc2d62d0486 9.5.0 cited
-
Switch to CRC-32C in WAL and other places.
- 5028f22f6eb0 9.5.0 cited
-
Remove support for 64-bit CRC.
- 404bc51cde9d 9.5.0 cited
-
Change CRCs in WAL records from 64bit to 32bit for performance reasons.
- 21fda22ec46d 8.1.0 cited
Greetings, * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > > AFAICS, the only options to make that work with JSON are (1) introduce > > a new hand-coded JSON parser designed for frontend operation, (2) add > > a dependency on an external JSON parser that we can use from frontend > > code, or (3) adapt the existing JSON parser used in the backend so > > that it can also be used in the frontend. > > ... I'd > > be willing to do (3) if somebody could explain to me how to solve the > > problems with porting that code to work on the frontend side, but the > > only suggestion so far as to how to do that is to port memory > > contexts, elog/report, and presumably encoding handling to work on the > > frontend side. That seems to me to be an unreasonably large lift, > > Yeah, agreed. The only consideration that'd make that a remotely > sane idea is that if somebody did the work, there would be other > uses for it. (One that comes to mind immediately is cleaning up > ecpg's miserably-maintained fork of the backend datetime code.) > > But there's no denying that it would be a large amount of work > (if it's even feasible), and nobody has stepped up to volunteer. > It's not reasonable to hold up this particular feature waiting > for that to happen. Sure, it'd be work, and for "adding a simple backup manifest", maybe too much to be worth considering ... but that's not what is going on here, is it? Are we really *just* going to add a backup manifest to pg_basebackup and call it done? That's not what I understood the goal here to be but rather to start doing a lot of other things with pg_basebackup beyond just having a manifest and if you think just a bit farther down the path, I think you start to realize that you're going to need this base set of capabilities to get to a point where pg_basebackup (or whatever it ends up being called) is able to have the kind of capabilities that exist in other PG backup software already. I'm sure I don't need to say where to find it, but I can point you to a pretty good example of a similar effort, and we didn't start with "build a manifest into a custom format" as the first thing implemented, but rather a great deal of work was first put into building out things like logging, memory management/contexts, error handling/try-catch, having a string type, a variant type, etc. In some ways, it's kind of impressive what we've got in our front-ends tools even though we don't have these things, really, and certainly not all in one nice library that they all use... but at the same time, I think that lack has also held those tools back, pg_basebackup among them. Anyway, off my high horse, I'll just say I agree w/ David and David wrt using JSON for this over hacking together yet another format. We didn't do that as thoroughly as we should have (we've got a JSON parser and all that, and use JSON quite a bit, but the actual manifest format is a mix of ini-style and JSON, because it's got more in it than just a list of files, something that I suspect will also end up being true of this down the road and for good reasons, and we started with the ini format and discovered it sucked and then started embedding JSON in it...), and we've come to realize that was a bad idea, and intend to fix it in our next manifest major version bump. Would be unfortunate to see PG making that same mistake. Thanks, Stephen