Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 3:31 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> That would be a reasonable answer if we deem the problem to be
>> just "the buildfarm is unhappy". What I'm wondering about is
>> whether the feature will be useful to end users with this
>> pathname length restriction.
> Possibly you're getting a little too enthusiastic about these revert
> requests, because I'd say it's at least a decade too late to get rid
> of pg_basebackup.
I misunderstood the context then. I thought you had just added
support for tablespaces in this area. If pg_basebackup has been
choking on overly-long tablespace symlinks this whole time, then
the lack of field complaints suggests it's not such a common
case after all.
regards, tom lane
