X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584F49DCD8D for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:12:35 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10191-09 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:12:37 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F54A9DCD47 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:12:32 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k2KNCZsa008774; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:12:35 -0500 (EST) To: "Thomas F. O'Connell" cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Online Backups: Minor Caveat, Major Addition? In-reply-to: <2DD8310C-92A3-495D-8AA5-499E6E43B28C@sitening.com> References: <42D1F5FC-42DD-49D8-8509-0D68C5B9384C@sitening.com> <8558.1142894925@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2DD8310C-92A3-495D-8AA5-499E6E43B28C@sitening.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Thomas F. O'Connell" message dated "Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:57:23 -0600" Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:12:35 -0500 Message-ID: <8773.1142896355@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.113 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113] X-Spam-Score: 0.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/24 X-Sequence-Number: 3481 "Thomas F. O'Connell" writes: > What about the larger suggested change of breaking that section into > three more granular subsections? I could see commentary being > slightly more helpful for each. No particular opinion from here. Someone (was it Scott Marlowe?) recently volunteered to draft a complete restructuring of the admin docs --- so it would probably be better to think about this as part of that effort rather than a standalone change. regards, tom lane