public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Stephen Frost <[email protected]>
To: Chapman Flack <[email protected]>
Cc: David Steele <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 15:05:23 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <164589413251.1035.2695761148079719188.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org>
	<20220226220614.GA673898@nathanxps13>
	<20220301055100.GA1002387@nathanxps13>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<20220301173208.GB1031413@nathanxps13>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

Greetings,

* Chapman Flack ([email protected]) wrote:
> On 03/01/22 14:14, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> There can't really be many teams out there thinking "we'll just ignore
> >> these scripts forever, and nothing bad will happen." They all know they'll
> >> have to do stuff sometimes. But it matters how we allow them to schedule it.
> > 
> > We only make these changes between major versions.  That's as much as we
> > should be required to provide.
> 
> It's an OSS project, so I guess we're not required to provide anything.
> 
> But in the course of this multi-release exclusive to non-exclusive
> transition, we already demonstrated, in 7117685, that we can avoid
> inflicting immediate breakage when there's nothing in our objective
> that inherently requires it, and avoiding it is relatively easy.
> 
> I can't bring myself to think that was a bad precedent.

It's actively bad because we are ridiculously inconsistent when it comes
to these things and we're terrible about ever removing anything once
it's gotten into the tree as 'deprecated'.  Witness that it's 8 years
since 7117685 and we still have these old and clearly broken APIs
around.  We absolutely need to move *away* from this approach, exactly
how 2dedf4d9, much more recently than 7117685, for all of its other
flaws, did.

> So if I'm outvoted here and the reason is "look, a lighter burden is
> involved this time than that time", then ok. I would rather bow to that
> argument on the specific facts of one case than abandon the precedent
> from 7117685 generally.

It's far from precedent- if anything, it's quite the opposite from how
most changes around here are made, and much more recent commits in the
same area clearly tossed out entirely the idea of trying to maintain
some kind of backwards compatibility with existing scripts.

Thanks,

Stephen


Attachments:

  [application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (819B, ../[email protected]/2-signature.asc)
  download

view thread (18+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox