On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 07:22:17AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 4:32 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 03:27:59PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> >> + subdirectory of both the current directory and the > >> >> + <envar>PGDATA</envar> directory. > >> >> This could say "of both the current directory and *then* the PGDATA > >> >> directory" to outline the order of the actions taken by the check > >> >> routine. Just my 2c on the matter. > >> > > >> > Ah, I see your point. I ended up rewording the text to be more explicit > >> > about the supplied argument and "searching". Updated patch attached. > >> > >> - Directory in which to find log segment files. The default is to > >> search > >> - for them in the <literal>pg_wal</literal> subdirectory of the > >> current > >> - directory. > >> + Specifies a directory in which to find log segment files. > >> + In addition, searches are performed in the current directory, > >> + and the <literal>pg_wal</literal> subdirectory of both the current > >> + directory and the <envar>PGDATA</envar> directory. > >> Hm. This still misses the point that the lookup at PGDATA is done only > >> if no directory is defined. What do you think about the patch attached > >> that lists the five possible patterns: 2 for the case where a > >> directory is defined, and 3 for the default case. > > > > Understood. Here is an updated patch which incorporates your > > suggestions. > > Thanks. This looks good to me.
Slightly modified version applied and backpatched to 9.6 (use pg_xlog). Thanks for your help. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
