Re: block-level incremental backup

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@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: 2019-09-05T03:25:46Z
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 Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 10:08 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> > For generating a
> > file, you can always emit the newest and "best" tar format, but for
> > reading a file, you probably want to be prepared for older or cruftier
> > variants.  Maybe not -- I'm not super-familiar with the tar on-disk
> > format.  But I think there must be a reason why tar libraries exist,
> > and I don't want to write a new one.
>
> We need to be sure as well that the library chosen does not block
> access to a feature in all the various platforms we have.

Well, again, my preference is to just not make this particular feature
work natively with tar files.  Then I don't need to choose a library,
so the question is moot.

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