Re: block-level incremental backup
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan.ladhe@enterprisedb.com>,
Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com>,
vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>,
Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>,
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-09-03T15:00:22Z
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 →
-
Don't call data type input functions in GUC check hooks
- 21f428ebde39 12.0 cited
Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com> writes: > +1 using the library to tar. Uh, *what* library? pg_dump's pg_backup_tar.c is about 1300 lines, a very large fraction of which is boilerplate for interfacing to pg_backup_archiver's APIs. The stuff that actually knows specifically about tar looks to be maybe a couple hundred lines, plus there's another couple hundred lines of (rather duplicative?) code in src/port/tar.c. None of it is rocket science. I can't believe that it'd be a good tradeoff to create a new external dependency to replace that amount of code. In case you haven't noticed, our luck with depending on external libraries has been abysmal. Possibly there's an argument for refactoring things so that there's more stuff in tar.c and less elsewhere, but let's not go looking for external code to depend on. regards, tom lane