| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Pradeep Kumar <spradeepkumar29(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Assistance Needed: Issue with pg_upgrade and --link option |
| Date: | 2023-06-28 09:44:17 |
| Message-ID: | 31e4fb0c-00be-4f7d-a708-a588e50cb23e@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 28.06.23 08:24, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-06-28 at 11:49 +0530, Pradeep Kumar wrote:
>> I was under the impression that the --link option would create hard links between the
>> old and new cluster's data files, but it appears that the entire old cluster data was
>> copied to the new cluster, resulting in a significant increase in the new cluster's size.
>
> Please provide some numbers, ideally
>
> du -sk <old_data_directory> <new_data_directory>
I don't think you can observe the effects of the --link option this way.
It would just give you the full size count for both directories, even
though the point to the same underlying inodes.
To see the effect, you could perhaps use `df` to see how much overall
disk space the upgrade step eats up.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nazir Bilal Yavuz | 2023-06-28 10:09:14 | Show WAL write and fsync stats in pg_stat_io |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2023-06-28 09:37:39 | Re: Changing types of block and chunk sizes in memory contexts |