| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: -Wformat-zero-length |
| Date: | 2012-08-10 23:48:13 |
| Message-ID: | 5569DD81-5188-4BD8-A6FF-1FA22146D5C9@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> Another thing worth considering is to have pg_upgrade init, stop and
>> start clusters as necessary instead of requesting the user to do it.
>> I think this is two less steps.
>
> Then you'd need to expose the entire pg_ctl shutdown mode logic through pg_upgrade, which might not make things simpler.
What about having single user mode talk fe/be protocol, and talk to it via a UNIX pipe, with pg_upgrade starting the single user backend as a subprocess?
--
dim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-08-11 01:25:23 | Re: -Wformat-zero-length |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-08-10 23:19:45 | Re: bug of pg_trgm? |