Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Date: 2022-08-04 19:31:39
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaA9rafqO8qB92zxBmkHJDsXASzY6r2aqx6TWYpv95iDQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 3:23 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 12:15 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Given that the old cluster is suffering no new write
> > transactions, there's probably exactly two values that are legal: one
> > being the value from the old cluster, which we know, and the other
> > being whatever a vacuum of that table would produce, which we don't
> > know, although we do know that it's somewhere in that range.
>
> What about autoanalyze?

What about it?

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-08-04 19:32:00 Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2022-08-04 19:22:32 Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade