MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1346291848.17422.11.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
References: <4E794FB5.80400@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<1316613536.14119.6.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com>
	<4E7A6D0D.4060106@2ndQuadrant.com> <4E7A887F.8010908@timbira.com>
	<CAK3UJRHChOcGQ0kzu01wZX6PB9pScHSzg1X+hThdR7QXWoe1yw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120816011347.GF8353@momjian.us> <502EA0D0.10004@gmx.net>
	<20120825230755.GE10814@momjian.us>
	<20120825234026.GG10814@momjian.us>
	<1346039025.5873.16.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
	<20120827134641.GD11088@momjian.us>
	<1346291848.17422.11.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 11:15:30 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CABUevEzBGJoVM5PG7U6A2XJa2u71BJh6+MjR4jC8geM=qHC3dQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: somewhat wrong archive_command example
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com>,
	Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>,
	Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:57 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 09:46 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> I thought the idea was just to show what a shell script might look like
>> --- we could say it does the same as a single-line copy, but then people
>> could improve it, or we could add a comment to show how people could
>> improve it.
>
> Why can't we provide the improved version to begin with, if we know it
> needs improvement?  I think we don't really know what it should look
> like, do we?

+1.


>> > I think what we should do is write a wrapper program in C that covers
>> > all the bases, support all platforms, and supports a handful of the most
>> > commonly used copy methods (cp, scp, etc. + compression).  Then everyone
>> > can just use that and doesn't have to figure all these things out from
>> > scratch every time.
>>
>> I doubt it would work because people like the flexibility of shell
>> scripts.
>
> Well, we thought that about the base backup, but now we have
> pg_basebackup, which supports two output methods that should cover most
> cases.  If we could provide an archive command that has two or three
> methods, that could also cover most uses.  Of course, in either case you
> are free to write your own script.

I would say the majority of people *don't* like the flexibility of
shellscripts. They want something simple to use. pg_receivexlog on 9.2
is going to help some of them (as a completement to pg_basebackup).
But also shipping something to use for archive_command that just
copies the files in a proper way would definitely help for usability.

As long as we keep the write-your-own-script-however-you-like method,
just like we did for pg_basebackup, doing this can only be an
improvement. And I don't see anybody suggesting we *remove* this
capability.


-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/