On 2020-10-29 03:44, Justin Pryzby wrote:
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/contrib.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/contrib.sgml
index 4e833d79ef..be4292ec33 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/contrib.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/contrib.sgml
@@ -199,6 +199,5 @@ pages.
part of the core PostgreSQL distribution.
-
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 05:28:46PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Removing pg_standby has been proposed a couple of times in the past. See
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170913064824.rqflkadxwpboa...@alap3.anarazel.de
> for the latest attempt.
>
> Masao-san, back in 2014 you
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 3:40 PM Michael Banck wrote:
> I guess not many will complain about pg_standby going away, but I am
> under the impression that pg_archivecleanup is still used a lot in PITR
> backup environments as a handy tool to expire WAL related to expired
> base backups. I certainly
On 02/11/2020 20:26, Justin Pryzby wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 08:40:31PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 28.10.2020, 21:44 -0500 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
Forking this thread:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/fd93f1c5-7818-a02c-01e5-1075ac0d4...@iki.fi
I think these are
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 08:40:31PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 28.10.2020, 21:44 -0500 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
> > Forking this thread:
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/fd93f1c5-7818-a02c-01e5-1075ac0d4...@iki.fi
> > I think these are old-fashioned since 9.6 (?), so
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 28.10.2020, 21:44 -0500 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
> Forking this thread:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/fd93f1c5-7818-a02c-01e5-1075ac0d4...@iki.fi
Glancing over this in the context of pg_standby/pg_archivecleanup, I am
not sure Heikki's "Ditto" is about "remove
