Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Дата
Msg-id 8353.1330551267@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Список pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> The utility would run in the old cluster before upgrading, so the the flag
>> would have to be present in the old version. pg_upgrade would check that the
>> flag is set, refusing to upgrade if it isn't, with an error like "please run
>> pre-upgrade utility first".

> I find that a pretty unappealing design; it seems to me it'd be much
> easier to make the new cluster cope with everything.

Easier for who?  I don't care for the idea of code that has to cope with
two page formats, or before long N page formats, because if we don't
have some mechanism like this then we will never be able to decide that
an old data format is safely dead.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_upgrade --logfile option documentation
Следующее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2