Re: pg_upgrade and rsync
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade and rsync |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20150127153411.GL4655@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade and rsync (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-01-27 10:20:48 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >>> I don't understand why that'd be better than simply fixing (yes, that's > >>> imo the correct term) pg_upgrade to retain relfilenodes across the > >>> upgrade. Afaics there's no conflict risk and it'd make the clusters much > >>> more similar, which would be good; independent of rsyncing standbys. > > > >> +1. > > > > That's certainly impossible for the system catalogs, which means you > > have to be able to deal with relfilenode discrepancies for them, which > > means that maintaining the same relfilenodes for user tables is of > > dubious value. > > Why is that impossible for the system catalogs? Maybe it's not impossible for existing catalogs, but it's certainly complicated. But I don't think it's all that desirable anyway - they're not the same relation after the pg_upgrade anyway (initdb/pg_dump filled them). That's different for the user defined relations. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: