On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> But it was rejected because its change might break the existing app. > > It might break existing applications if it returns "FE" instead of "FF", > but never-used filename surprises users. (IMO, the existing apps probably > crash if "FF" returned, i.e, 1/256 of the time.) > > Should it return the *next* reasonable log filename instead of "FF"? > For example, 000000020000002000000000 for the above case.
I wonder if that change also breaks the existing app. But since I've never seen the app that doesn't use that filename at face value, I agree to change the existing (odd for me) behavior of pg_stop_backup(). Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
