Hi,
On 2022-03-11 10:19:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> Thanks for the report. The problem here is that, when the output is
> standard output (-D -), pg_basebackup can only produce a single output
> file, so the manifest gets injected into the tar file on the client
> side rather than being written separately as we do in normal cases.
> However, that only works if we're receiving a tar file that we can
> parse from the server, and here the server is sending a compressed
> tarfile. The current code mistakely attempts to parse the compressed
> tarfile as if it were an uncompressed tarfile, which causes the error
> messages that you are seeing (and which I can also reproduce here). We
> actually have enough infrastructure available in pg_basebackup now
> that we could do the "right thing" in this case: decompress the data
> received from the server, parse the resulting tar file, inject the
> backup manifest, construct a new tar file, and recompress. However, I
> think that's probably not a good idea, because it's unlikely that the
> user will understand that the data is being compressed on the server,
> then decompressed, and then recompressed again, and the performance of
> the resulting pipeline will probably not be very good. So I think we
> should just refuse this command. Patch for that attached.
You could also just append a manifest as a compresed tar to the compressed tar
stream. Unfortunately GNU tar requires -i to read concated compressed
archives, so perhaps that's not quite an alternative.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
