Re: [HACKERS] Transactional sequence stuff breaks pg_upgrade

Tom Lane wrote:

> On closer inspection, the only thing that pg_upgrade needs is to be
> able to do ALTER SEQUENCE OWNED BY without a relfilenode bump.  PFA
> two versions of a patch that fixes this problem, at least to the
> extent that it gets through check-world without triggering the Assert
> I added to GetNewRelFileNode (which HEAD doesn't).  The first one
> is a minimally-invasive hack; the second one puts the responsibility
> for deciding if a sequence rewrite is needed into init_params.  That's
> bulkier but might be useful if we ever grow additional ALTER SEQUENCE
> options that don't need a rewrite.  OTOH, I'm not very clear on what
> such options might look like, so maybe the extra flexibility is useless.
> Thoughts?

I vote for the second patch.  I don't have a clear idea either, but I'm
pretty sure the logical-replication people is going to be hacking on
sequences some more, yet, and this is likely to come in handy.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services