Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B7991D012E9
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  3 Feb 2012 05:10:31 -0400 (AST)
Received: from dd2030.kasserver.com ([85.13.128.37])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <mailings@oopsware.de>) id 1RtFA4-0006Se-W4
	for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:10:31 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (exit.credativ.com [87.139.82.80])
	by dd2030.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D9B28E005D;
	Fri,  3 Feb 2012 10:10:13 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:10:11 +0100
From: Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>,
	Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com>
cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org>,
	Gilles Darold <gilles.darold@dalibo.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Patch pg_is_in_backup()
Message-ID: <691525170451D3F76CEF7ED1@apophis.local>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAHGQGwEE5Zk05cPeTVWjd+TYce10zemMs_Li7ekkroiFKPj9kw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4F26E291.9020605@dalibo.com>
	<CABRT9RAo_xTOVdBAEDqzcP+QvoHa0SZW1Ud1p3vjmA5tJUnYLw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABUevExm4_a-Yw3pt=weppb5ckzAYZwK3e79m__sznQNjjDveg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F2B470F.5070107@timbira.com>
	<CAHGQGwEE5Zk05cPeTVWjd+TYce10zemMs_Li7ekkroiFKPj9kw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a1 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; size=510
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Archive-Number: 201202/120
X-Sequence-Number: 202485



--On 3. Februar 2012 13:21:11 +0900 Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:

> It seems to be more user-friendly to introduce a view like pg_stat_backup
> rather than the function returning an array.

I like this idea. A use case i saw for monitoring backup_label's in the past, 
was mainly to discover a forgotten exclusive pg_stop_backup() (e.g. due to 
broken backup scripts). If the view would be able to distinguish both, 
exclusive and non-exclusive backups, this would be great.

-- 
Thanks

	Bernd