On 2019-09-25 20:48, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> CC Alexey for reasons that become clear below.
>
> Another thing in 0002 is that you're adding a "-R" switch to pg_rewind,
> but we have another patch in the commitfest using the same switch for a
> different purpose. Maybe you guys need to get to an agreement over who
> uses the letter :-)
>
Thank you for mentioning me. I've been monitoring silently this thread
and was ready to modify my patch if this one will proceed faster. It
seems like it's time :)
On 2019-09-25 22:26, Laurenz Albe wrote:
>
> I believe that -R should be reserved for creating recovery.conf,
> similar to pg_basebackup.
>
> Everything else would be confusing.
>
> I've been missing pg_rewind -R!
>
Yes, -R is already used in pg_basebackup for the same functionality, so
it seems natural to use it here as well for consistency.
I will review options naming in my own patch and update it accordingly.
Maybe -w/-W or -a/-A options will be good, since it's about WALs
retrieval from archive.
Regards
--
Alexey
P.S. Just noticed that in v12 fullname of -R option in pg_basebackup is
still --write-recovery-conf, which is good for a backward compatibility,
but looks a little bit awkward, since recovery.conf doesn't exist
already, doesn't it? However, one may read it as
'write-recovery-configuration', then it seems fine.