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

Re: Upgrading rant.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>,Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Upgrading rant.
Date: 2003-01-04 01:19:20
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> There isn't any fundamental reason why we cannot have a pg_upgrade
>> utility; claiming that there is something wrong with how we handle
>> catalog changes misses the point.

> pg_upgrade does work, assuming there are no changes to the index or heap
> file formats.

Does it really work?  I had thought that there were some issues
associated with adjusting transaction numbers that couldn't be solved
by pg_upgrade in its present shell-script form; I was anticipating that
pg_upgrade would have to be rewritten as a C program so that it could
get at stuff at the necessary low level.  I cannot recall the details
right at the moment though.

> In fact, there was a bug in the
> handling of clog or wal files, but I didn't find out about it until long
> after 7.2 because no one was using it.

This may be what I was recalling.  Did you find a bulletproof fix?

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-01-04 01:31:08
Subject: Re: Upgrading rant.
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-01-04 01:08:03
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group