Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> writes: > But, it is hard to tell what the real solution is, because the doc doesn't > explain why it should refuse (and fail) to overwrite an existing file. The > only reason I can think of to make that recommendation is because it is > easy to accidentally configure two clusters to attempt to archive to the > same location, and having them overwrite each others files should be > guarded against. If I am right, it seems like this reason should be added > to the docs, so people know what they are defending against. And if I am > wrong, it seems even more important that the (correct) reason is added to > the docs.
If memory serves, that is the reason ... and I thought it *was* explained somewhere in the docs. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers