On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:38 AM Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > I am still not sure why we need SEND_BACKUP_FILELIST as a separate command. > Can't we return the file list with START_BACKUP itself?
I had the same thought, but I think it's better to keep them separate. Somebody might want to use the SEND_BACKUP_FILELIST command for something other than a backup (I actually think it should be called just SEND_FILE_LIST)
Sure. Thanks for the recommendation. To keep the function names in sync, I intend to do following the
. Somebody might want to start a backup without getting a file list because they're going to copy the files at the FS level. Somebody might want to get a list of files to process after somebody else has started the backup on another connection. Or maybe nobody wants to do any of those things, but it doesn't seem to cost us much of anything to split the commands, so I think we should.