| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects |
| Date: | 2021-03-23 18:35:46 |
| Message-ID: | 985941.1616524546@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info> writes:
> So the question remains, how do we name this?
> --pg-dump-options "<string>"
> --pg-restore-options "<string>"
If you're passing multiple options, that is
--pg-dump-options "--foo=x --bar=y"
it seems just horribly fragile. Lose the double quotes and suddenly
--bar is a separate option to pg_upgrade itself, not part of the argument
for the previous option. That's pretty easy to do when passing things
through shell scripts, too. So it'd likely be safer to write
--pg-dump-option=--foo=x --pg-dump-option=--bar=y
which requires pg_upgrade to allow aggregating multiple options,
but you'd probably want it to act that way anyway.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2021-03-23 18:51:02 | Re: make the stats collector shutdown without writing the statsfiles if the immediate shutdown is requested. |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-03-23 18:30:33 | Re: Change default of checkpoint_completion_target |