On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:44:29AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of jue sep 29 09:56:09 -0300 2011:
> > Thinking some more, I don't need to know the data directory while the
> > server is down --- I already am starting it. pg_upgrade starts both old
> > and new servers during its check phase, and it could look up the
> > data_directory GUC variable and use that value when accessing files.
> > That would work for old and new servers. However, I assume that is
> > something we would not backpatch to 9.1.
> Why not? We've supported separate data/config dirs for a long time now,
> so it seems to me that pg_upgrade not coping with them is a bug. If
> pg_upgrade starts postmaster, it seems simple to grab the data_directory
> setting, is it not?
I was going to say. I'd view this as bringing the behavior of pg_upgrade
to a consistent state with postgres. I vote for it being backpatched to
9.0 even. For whatever my vote is worth.
Mr. Aaron W. Swenson
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-09-29 14:33:57|
|Subject: Re: Does RelCache/SysCache shrink except when relations are deleted? |
|Previous:||From: Merlin Moncure||Date: 2011-09-29 14:24:48|
|Subject: Re: Does RelCache/SysCache shrink except when relations are deleted?|