On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > Those backup scripts might very well be, today, producing invalid > backups though, which would be much less good..
True. However, I suspect that depends on what procedure is actually being followed. If *everyone* who is using this is getting corrupt backups, then of course changing the behavior is a no-brainer. But if *some* people are getting correct backups and *some* people are getting incorrect backups, depending on procedure, then I think changing it is unwise. We should optimize for the case of a user who is currently doing something smart, not one who is doing something dumb. > I'd hate to have to do it, but we could technically add a GUC to address > this in the back-branches, no? I'm not sure that's really worthwhile > though.. That would be mighty ugly. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers