| From: | Ildus Kurbangaliev <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Torsten Zuehlsdorff <mailinglists(at)toco-domains(dot)de> | 
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Remove 1MB size limit in tsvector | 
| Date: | 2017-08-09 15:25:53 | 
| Message-ID: | 20170809182553.4704779e@wp.localdomain | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 09:01:44 +0200
Torsten Zuehlsdorff <mailinglists(at)toco-domains(dot)de> wrote:
> On 01.08.2017 22:00, Ildus K wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 15:33:08 -0400
> > Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Ildus K
> >> <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:  
> >>>> So this would break pg_upgrade for tsvector columns?  
> >>>
> >>> I added a function that will convert old tsvectors on the fly.
> >>> It's the approach used in hstore before.  
> >>
> >> Does that mean the answer to the question that I asked is "yes,
> >> but I have a workaround" or does it mean that the answer is "no"?
> >>  
> > 
> > It's a workaround. DatumGetTSVector and
> > DatumGetTSVectorCopy will upgrade tsvector on the fly if it
> > has old format.  
> 
> I'm not familiar with pg_upgrade, but want to ask: should this 
> workaround be part of pg_upgrade?
> 
> Greetings,
> Torsten
I chose the way when the data remains the same, until the user decides
to update it. I'm not so familiar with pg_upgrade myself and I don't
see now how the data will be converted with it, but it will anyway
increase downtime which is the shorter the better.
-- 
---
Ildus Kurbangaliev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shubham Barai | 2017-08-09 15:30:21 | Re: GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6) | 
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-09 15:25:34 | Re: "make check" with non-GNU make |