Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> There's no on-disk format changes, except for the additional flag in the
> page headers, so this does not affect pg_upgrade. However, if there's
> any "invalid" keys in the old index because of an incomplete insertion,
> the new code will not understand that. So you should run vacuum to
> ensure that there's no such invalid keys in the index before upgrading.
> Vacuum will print a message in the log if it finds any, and you will
> have to reindex. But that's what it suggests you to do anyway.
OK, pg_upgrade has code to report invalid gin and hash indexes because
of changes between PG 8.3 and 8.4. Is this something we would do for
9.0 to 9.1?
You are saying it would have to be run before the upgrade. Can it not
be run after?
I can output a script to VACUUM all such indexes, and tell users to
manually REINDEX any index that generates a warning messasge. I don't
have any way to automate an optional REINDEX step.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jeff Janes||Date: 2010-11-27 19:44:59|
|Subject: Re: contrib: auth_delay module|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-11-27 19:27:12|
|Subject: Report: Linux huge pages with Postgres|