public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feed8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
10+ messages / 3 participants
[nested] [flat]
* 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
@ 2012-11-21 18:09 Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Janes @ 2012-11-21 18:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-docs
Based on Jürgen Fuchsberger's experience described on the general
list, I think the following should have been back-patched to 8.4 and
8.3 (assuming it gets a minor update before it EOL) as well, not just
9.0.
In particular, in 8.4 chapter 24.4.5 it says "it will be up to you to
determine how far back you need to keep WAL segment files to have a
recoverable backup" but it dangerously does not mention that it is
also up to you to construct a backup_label file such that those WAL
segment files will actually get used.
commit 13e6d6c5da184abcdfcfc9874ad17ef09f4ea044
Author: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Aug 25 23:55:54 2010 +0000
Remove docs for "Incrementally Updated Backups" because it was of
questionable reliability; information moved to a wiki:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Incrementally_Updated_Backups
Backpatch to 9.0.
Cheers,
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-23 23:42 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2012-11-23 23:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Janes <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:09:15AM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> Based on Jürgen Fuchsberger's experience described on the general
> list, I think the following should have been back-patched to 8.4 and
> 8.3 (assuming it gets a minor update before it EOL) as well, not just
> 9.0.
>
> In particular, in 8.4 chapter 24.4.5 it says "it will be up to you to
> determine how far back you need to keep WAL segment files to have a
> recoverable backup" but it dangerously does not mention that it is
> also up to you to construct a backup_label file such that those WAL
> segment files will actually get used.
>
>
>
> commit 13e6d6c5da184abcdfcfc9874ad17ef09f4ea044
> Author: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed Aug 25 23:55:54 2010 +0000
>
> Remove docs for "Incrementally Updated Backups" because it was of
> questionable reliability; information moved to a wiki:
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Incrementally_Updated_Backups
>
> Backpatch to 9.0.
We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-24 00:26 ` Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Janes @ 2012-11-24 00:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
>
Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
under maintenance,
Cheers,
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-24 01:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 21:56 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2012-11-24 01:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Janes <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
> >
>
> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
> under maintenance,
There are three options for doc patches:
1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
100%, but that is what I normally do.
Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-24 21:56 ` Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 09:27 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 20:01 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Janes @ 2012-11-24 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
>> >
>>
>> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
>> under maintenance,
>
> There are three options for doc patches:
>
> 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
> 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
> 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
>
> In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
> clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
> 100%, but that is what I normally do.
>
> Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
pretty major one.
Cheers,
Jeff
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 21:56 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-26 09:27 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 20:02 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2012-11-26 09:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Janes <[email protected]>; +Cc: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Jeff Janes <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
>>> under maintenance,
>>
>> There are three options for doc patches:
>>
>> 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
>> 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
>> 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
>>
>> In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
>> clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
>> 100%, but that is what I normally do.
>>
>> Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
>
> It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
> think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
> should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
> pretty major one.
I think it can be considered a bugfix, and thus correcting a mistake.
But in generael, I think we may want to be a bit more aggressive in
backpatching these things. First because people will likely read the
docs for the version that they are using, and thus miss things. But
possibly even more important, because we know that Google (and others)
tend to link to older versions of the docs as search hits before the
newer ones for quite a long time after a release (or forever in some
cases), which makes it even more visible.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 21:56 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 09:27 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-26 20:02 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2012-11-26 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>; +Cc: Jeff Janes <[email protected]>; pgsql-docs
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:27:41AM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Jeff Janes <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
> >>> under maintenance,
> >>
> >> There are three options for doc patches:
> >>
> >> 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
> >> 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
> >> 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
> >>
> >> In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
> >> clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
> >> 100%, but that is what I normally do.
> >>
> >> Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
> >
> > It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
> > think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
> > should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
> > pretty major one.
>
> I think it can be considered a bugfix, and thus correcting a mistake.
>
> But in generael, I think we may want to be a bit more aggressive in
> backpatching these things. First because people will likely read the
> docs for the version that they are using, and thus miss things. But
> possibly even more important, because we know that Google (and others)
> tend to link to older versions of the docs as search hits before the
> newer ones for quite a long time after a release (or forever in some
> cases), which makes it even more visible.
See my new email; it doesn't appear in 8.4, and I probably checked that
at the time.
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 21:56 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-26 20:01 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 21:17 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2012-11-26 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Janes <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 01:56:27PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
> >> under maintenance,
> >
> > There are three options for doc patches:
> >
> > 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
> > 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
> > 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
> >
> > In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
> > clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
> > 100%, but that is what I normally do.
> >
> > Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
>
> It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
> think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
> should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
> pretty major one.
I checked just now and the unreliable advice does not appear in 8.4, so
it possible that in 2010 I checked and found it only applied back to
9.0, or I might only have checked 9.0. I don't remember now, but based
on the fact it was an incorrect recommendation, I probably would have
backpatched it as far back as possible. Sorry I was unclear on this
issue in previous emails.
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 21:56 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 20:01 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-26 21:17 ` Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 22:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Janes @ 2012-11-26 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 01:56:27PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
>> >> under maintenance,
>> >
>> > There are three options for doc patches:
>> >
>> > 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
>> > 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
>> > 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
>> >
>> > In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
>> > clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
>> > 100%, but that is what I normally do.
>> >
>> > Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
>>
>> It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
>> think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
>> should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
>> pretty major one.
>
> I checked just now and the unreliable advice does not appear in 8.4, so
> it possible that in 2010 I checked and found it only applied back to
> 9.0, or I might only have checked 9.0.
The docs were re-arranged, so it is present but in a different place.
Sorry, I should have included the URL in the first place (24.4.5) :
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/warm-standby.html
Cheers,
Jeff
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 21:56 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 20:01 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 21:17 ` Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
@ 2012-11-26 22:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2012-11-26 22:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Janes <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 01:17:18PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 01:56:27PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
> >> >> under maintenance,
> >> >
> >> > There are three options for doc patches:
> >> >
> >> > 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
> >> > 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
> >> > 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
> >> >
> >> > In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
> >> > clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
> >> > 100%, but that is what I normally do.
> >> >
> >> > Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
> >>
> >> It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
> >> think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
> >> should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
> >> pretty major one.
> >
> > I checked just now and the unreliable advice does not appear in 8.4, so
> > it possible that in 2010 I checked and found it only applied back to
> > 9.0, or I might only have checked 9.0.
>
> The docs were re-arranged, so it is present but in a different place.
>
> Sorry, I should have included the URL in the first place (24.4.5) :
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/warm-standby.html
OK, removed from 8.3 and 8.4 docs. I was looking in the 9.0+ file for
that section.
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-11-26 22:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-11-21 18:09 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups" Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-23 23:42 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 00:26 ` Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 01:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-24 21:56 ` Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 09:27 ` Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 20:02 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 20:01 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 21:17 ` Jeff Janes <[email protected]>
2012-11-26 22:36 ` Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox