On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 19:45, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> Hmm, that's not possible for the 'tar' output, but would work for 'dir' >> output. Another similar idea would be to withhold the control file in >> memory until the end of backup, and append it to the output as last. The >> backup can't be restored until the control file is written out. > >> That won't protect from more complicated scenarios, like if you take the >> backup without the -x flag, and copy some but not all of the required >> WAL files manually to the pg_xlog directory. But it'd be much better >> than nothing for 9.1. > > Maybe we're overcomplicating this. What about changing pg_basebackup to > print a message when the backup is completely sent/received? People > would get used to that quickly, and would know to be suspicious if they > didn't see it.
That would suck for scripts, and have people redirect the output to /dev/null instead, wouldn't it? And it violates the "unix expectation" that is that a successful command will not write anything to it's output... -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
