| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade bug found! |
| Date: | 2011-04-09 04:28:50 |
| Message-ID: | 1302323148-sup-1445@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Why is it important to have the original pg_clog files around? Since
the transactions in question are below the freeze horizon, surely the
tuples that involve those transaction have all been visited by vacuum
and thus removed if they were leftover from aborted transactions or
deleted, no? So you could just fill those files with the 0x55 pattern
(signalling "all transactions are committed") and the net result should
be the same. No?
Forgive me if I'm missing something. I haven't been following this
thread and I'm more than a little tired (but wanted to shoot this today
because I'm gonna be able to, until Monday).
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2011-04-09 04:32:28 | Re: Open issues for collations |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-04-09 04:01:26 | Re: pgindent |