Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade to clusters with a different WAL segmentsize
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade to clusters with a different WAL segmentsize |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20171113223237.ohwjzrgdpd5yjtg7@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade to clusters with a different WAL segment size (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade to clusters with a different WAL segment size
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-11-14 07:26:22 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 6:11 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Hm. I'm not really on-board with doing this in pg_upgrade. A more > > logical place seems to be pg_resetwal or something - there's no need to > > force a pg_upgrade cycle (which is pretty expensive on clusters with a > > significant number of objects) for somebody that wants to change the > > segment size of a cluster without changing the major version. > > pg_resetwal or a new tool seems like a more appropriate places for this. > > pg_upgrade makes use of pg_resetwal, so I am assuming that what Nathan > means is actually what you mean, so as pg_upgrade gains as well an > option with the segment size which will wrap the pg_resetwal's call. Even if that's the case, I fail to see why it'd be a good idea to have any sort of pg_upgrade integration here. We should make pg_resetwal's checks for this good enough, and not conflate something unrelated with pg_upgrade goals. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: