Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hlaBm-0003HS-DP for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:36:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hlaBl-00056f-84 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:36:49 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hlaBk-00055b-V9 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:36:48 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hlaBi-0001rU-N5 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:36:48 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x6BEahxG024132; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:36:43 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Robert Haas cc: Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: base backup client as auxiliary backend process In-reply-to: References: <61b8d18d-c922-ac99-b990-a31ba63cdcbb@2ndquadrant.com> Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas message dated "Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:23:17 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <24130.1562855803.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:36:43 -0400 Message-ID: <24131.1562855803@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Robert Haas writes: > On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 4:05 PM Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> My idea is that the postmaster can launch a base backup worker, wait >> till it's done, then proceed with the rest of the startup. initdb gets >> a special option to create a "minimal" data directory with only a few >> files, directories, and the usual configuration files. > Why do we even have to do that much? Can we remove the need for an > initdb altogether? Gotta have config files in place already, no? regards, tom lane