On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 06:22:47PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:08:23PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > I won't have time to do the bigger rewrite/reordeirng by then, but I can > > > certainly commit to having the smaller updates done to cover the new > > > functionality in less than a week.
> There is some duplication between the non-exclusive and exclusive backup > sections, but I wanted to make sure that each set of instructions can just > be followed top-to-bottom. > > I've also removed some tips that aren't really necessary as part of the > step-by-step instructions in order to keep things from exploding in size. > > Finally, I've changed references to "backup dump" to just be "backup", > because it's confusing to call them something with dumps in when it's not > pg_dump. Enough that I got partially confused myself while editing... > > Comments? I scanned this briefly, and it looks reasonable. I recommend committing it forthwith. > *** a/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml > --- b/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml > *************** > *** 818,823 **** test ! -f /mnt/server/archivedir/00000001000000A900000065 > && cp pg_xlog/ > --- 818,838 ---- > simple. It is very important that these steps are executed in > sequence, and that the success of a step is verified before > proceeding to the next step. > + </para> > + <para> > + Low level base backups can be made in a non-exclusive or an exclusive > + way. The non-exclusive method is recommended and the exclusive one will > + at some point be deprecated and removed. "I will deprecate X at some point" has the same effect as "I deprecate X now." If you have no doubt you want to deprecate it, I advise plainer phrasing like, "The exclusive method is deprecated and will eventually be removed." That is to say, just deprecate it right now. If you have doubts, omit deprecation. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers