Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #5288: Restoring a 7.4.5 -Fc dump using -j 2 segfaults (patch included)

From: Chris Travers <chris(at)metatrontech(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Jon Erdman (aka StuckMojo)" <postgresql(at)thewickedtribe(dot)net>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #5288: Restoring a 7.4.5 -Fc dump using -j 2 segfaults (patch included)
Date: 2010-01-19 18:37:49
Message-ID: 5ed37b141001191037i3b6a988at7061ec1bfc3d10ab@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Just weighing in here.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> It doesn't seem worth it
> to try to support parallel restore from nearly-obsolete versions, and
> I suspect that we couldn't do it even if we tried --- the reason the
> representation got changed is that the old way simply didn't work for
> any significant use of the dependency info.  Just ignoring the
> dependencies, as your patch effectively proposes, is going to lead to
> restore failures or worse.

Just to clarify, the only part that would not be supported would be
the parallel part, right?

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Jon ErdmanDate: 2010-01-19 18:43:49
Subject: Re: BUG #5288: Restoring a 7.4.5 -Fc dump using -j 2 segfaults (patch included)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-19 18:17:46
Subject: Re: BUG #5288: Restoring a 7.4.5 -Fc dump using -j 2 segfaults (patch included)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group