Feedback on pgd 5 - "Backup and recovery" should reference postgresql.conf / postgresql.auto.conf, NOT recovery.conf

[harada11111]

What topic do you have feedback on?

https://github.com/EnterpriseDB/docs/blob/main/product_docs/docs/pgd/5/backup.mdx

Your feedback

Seeing the Postgresql documents , "recovery.conf" cannot be used in PostgreSQL versions 12 and later.
It prevents the instance startup.

Is this supported for EDB ?

Also would like you add some sample process (preparation for recovery/DR , command samples for PITR , node recovery ,etc ) on this page.

Thanks in advance.

[josh-heyer]

Not sure what you're encountering here - recovery.conf should be usable as documented. Could you clarify?

[harada11111]

I saw this . https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/recovery-config.html On PostgreSQL 12 and above, archive recovery, streaming replication, and PITR<https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/continuous-archiving.html> are configured using normal server configuration parameters<https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/runtime-config-replication.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-REPLICATION-STANDBY>. These are set in postgresql.conf or via ALTER SYSTEM<https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-altersystem.html> like any other parameter. The server will not start if a recovery.conf exists. Best regards, Motoaki Harada

…

________________________________ From: Josh Heyer ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 01:20 To: EnterpriseDB/docs ***@***.***> Cc: harada11111 ***@***.***>; Author ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [EnterpriseDB/docs] Feedback on pgd 5 - "Backup and recovery" (Issue #5035) Not sure what you're encountering here - recovery.conf should be usable as documented. Could you clarify? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#5035 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BEFOCNTIXX6PKVVXTXR6IM3YFYQ6TAVCNFSM6AAAAAA7VT4AP6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMRTGA4DCNRVGM>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[josh-heyer]

Ah, I see what you're talking about. Yes, we need to correct this (and should probably also add a note to the 3.7 BDR docs) - good catch, thanks!