Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > Yeah, that is a clear advantage of that method. Didn't read up on pax > format backwards compatibility, does it have some trick to achieve > something similar?
I didn't read the fine print but it sounded like the extended header would look like a separate file entry to a non-aware tar implementation, which would write it out as a file and then get totally confused when the length specified in the overlength file's entry didn't match the amount of data following. So it's a nice solution for some properties but doesn't fail-soft for file length. Not clear that there's any way to achieve that though. Another thought is we could make pg_basebackup simply skip any files that exceed RELSEG_SIZE, on the principle that you don't really need/want enormous log files to get copied anyhow. We'd still need the pax extension if the user had configured large RELSEG_SIZE, but having a compatible tar could be documented as a requirement of doing that. 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