Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\))
Subject: Re: Return codes for archive and restore commands
From: =?utf-8?B?0J7Qu9C10LMg0KHQsNC80L7QudC70L7Qsg==?= <splarv@ya.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20181129022347.GH626@paquier.xyz>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 18:52:44 +0300
Cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <567B704B-90EF-4442-AED0-54F976AFEEAA@ya.ru>
References: <154340283171.1324.10549444217937216132@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <20181129022347.GH626@paquier.xyz>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Precedence: bulk


> If you were to rewrite those paragraphs or make them more precise, how
> would you actually shape your suggestions?  I personally quite like =
the
> current formulations, but I am rather used to it to be honest.
> --
> Michael

Yep, I am for make them more precise. Now this paragraphs describe =
PostgreSQL and bash behavior  for users of PostgreSQL and may be they =
are good in this. But for a script or application programmer must be =
described not only behavior of PostgreSQL, but also precisely described =
the program interface. For instance, aws cli utility, that I used for my =
archive and restore commands sometimes return 255 code, for instance, in =
a case of network fault to connect to S3 (object get command). And I was =
surprised that the PostgreSQL suddenly stoped in such case, there was =
nothing in documentation about this.  So explicitly describing behavior =
of PostgreSQL in terms of script returning codes will be useful for =
script programmes.=