From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and rsync |
Date: | 2015-02-20 15:21:56 |
Message-ID: | 20150220152156.GB20442@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:45:08AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > #3 bothered me as well because it was not specific enough. I like what
> > you've added to clarify the procedure.
>
> Good. It took me a while to understand why they have to be in sync ---
> because we are using rsync in size-only-comparison mode, if they are not
> in sync we might update some files whose sizes changed, but not others,
> and the old slave would be broken. The new slave is going to get all
> new files or hard links for user files, so it would be fine, but we
> should be able to fall back to the old slaves, and having them in sync
> allows that.
Also, since there was concern about the instructions, I am thinking of
applying the patch only to head for 9.5, and then blog about it if
people want to test it.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2015-02-20 16:20:28 | Re: Precedence of standard comparison operators |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-02-20 15:21:50 | Merge compact/non compact commits, make aborts dynamically sized |