Re: Remove Deprecated Exclusive Backup Mode

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

To: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>

Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Adrien NAYRAT <adrien.nayrat@anayrat.info>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>

Date: 2019-02-26T03:53:16Z

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 →

Remove exclusive backup mode
- 39969e2a1e4d 15.0 landed

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 4:38 PM David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> > FWIW, if you weren't selling backrest quite so hard everywhere backups
> > are mentioned, I'd find this thread a lot more convicing.
>
> pgBackRest has not used exclusive backups since the new API was
> introduced in 9.6 so this is not an issue for our users.
>
> Over time we have contributed back to Postgres in areas we thought could
> be improved based on our work on the pgBackRest project: 6ad8ac60,
> 9fe3c644, 017e4f25, 78874531, 449338cc, 98267ee8, 8694cc96, 920a5e50,
> c37b3d08, 5fc1670b, b981df4c.  This does not include the various backup
> related patches that we have reviewed.
>
> If promoting pgBackRest were our primary concern then it would be in our
> interest to allow Postgres exclusive backups to stay broken and
> pg_basebackup to be as primitive as possible.

Hmm, so what you're saying is that you'd like to disable an API that
some non-backrest users are relying upon but which no backrest users
are relying upon.  And you don't understand why some non-backrest
users are opposed to that plan.  Is that a correct summary of your
position?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company