Horton

Re: Add exclusive backup deprecation notes to documentation

Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Martín Marqués <martin@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2019-03-29T12:54:40Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 1:49 PM David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:

> On 3/29/19 12:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:45 AM David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
> wrote:
> >> Are we planning to back-patch this?  The deprecation was added to the
> >> docs in 9.6 -- I think these clarifications would be helpful.
> >
> > I wasn't planning too, but I guess we could consider it.  I'd be more
> > inclined to back-patch the documentation changes than the message text
> > changes, but what do other people think?
>
> I think we should definitely do the docs, I'm 50% on the message.  You
> could argue that is is a behavioral change, but it is pretty important
> info.
>

+1 on the docs.

Is the changes to the messages going to cause issues or weirdness for
translators? That would be a reason not to backpatch it. Without that, I'm
leaning towards backpatching it.

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>

Commits

  1. Warn more strongly about the dangers of exclusive backup mode.