| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |
| Date: | 2016-08-28 14:07:47 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYhJ-3sbxG0H64q16pJBereWoSJPNmnEWV+j_xC_GiVRQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something here - but why would we need to do any of
> that? The WAL already isn't compatible between versions, and we don't
> reuse the old server's WAL anyway? Isn't all that's needed relaxing some
> error check?
Yeah. If this change is made in a new major version - and how else
would we do it? - it doesn't introduce any incompatibility that
wouldn't be present already. pg_upgrade doesn't (and can't) migrate
WAL.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-08-28 14:08:34 | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-08-28 14:03:27 | Re: Checksum error and VACUUM FULL |