At 2015-06-11 14:28:36 +0900, michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: > > After spending the night thinking about that, honestly, I think that > we should go with (2) and keep the base backup as light-weight as > possible and not bother about a GUC.
OK. Then the patch I posted earlier should be sufficient. -- Abhijit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
