On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 at 12:31, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Gyan, > > +1 for the idea. This point has already been discussed since the initial > commit > [1], but it has left till now. I'm happy if you can take initiative. > Of course I can review your patches. > > Per my understanding, pg_upgrade puts logfiles at the directory, under > "${PGDATANEW}/pg_upgrade_output.d/${timestamp}". See Note part in [2]. > I feel more straightforward way is to follow that approach: > > 1. pg_createsubscriber creates a directory > pg_createsubscriber_output.d/${timestamp}. > ${timestamp} has the same format as ISO 8601 (%Y%m%dT%H%M%S). > 2. pg_craetesubscriber saves outputs under the directory. > 3. Outputs can be retained when the command failed or --retain is specified. > Otherwise, they are removed at the end.
If I recall correctly, this was implemented that way earlier, but the approach was abandoned around [1]. The primary reason was that when users take a backup of the data directory, they would need to explicitly manage the exclusion of this data, which was considered undesirable. > Are there benefits to provide -l option? By providing this as an option, users can store the log files outside the data directory, eliminating the need for any additional handling during backups. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d546c4bb-92d1-4e2d-898f-48234b12ed25%40app.fastmail.com Regards, Vignesh
