Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table.

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg S <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table.
Date: 2016-02-17 07:44:43
Message-ID: CAD21AoBmEwWwHqmmKnYaWog-Vx-d2150dCjeA0+sqHuNRR826g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 03:57:01PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>>> > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:56:25PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> > >> > I agreed on ripping out the converter plugin ability of pg_upgrade.
>>> > >> > Remember pg_upgrade was originally written by EnterpriseDB staff, and I
>>> > >> > think they expected their closed-source fork of Postgres might need a
>>> > >> > custom page converter someday, but it never needed one, and at this
>>> > >> > point I think having the code in there is just making things more
>>> > >> > complex. I see _no_ reason for community Postgres to use a plugin
>>> > >> > converter because we are going to need that code for every upgrade from
>>> > >> > pre-9.6 to 9.6+, so why not just hard-code in the functions we need. We
>>> > >> > can remove it once 9.5 is end-of-life.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Hm, we should rather remove the source code around PAGE_CONVERSION and
>>> > >> page.c at 9.6?
>>> > >
>>> > > Yes. I can do it if you wish.
>>> >
>>> > I see. I understand that page-converter code would be useful for some
>>> > future cases, but makes thing more complex.
>>>
>>> If we're not going to use it, let's get rid of it right away. There's
>>> no point in having a feature that adds complexity just because we might
>>> find some hypothetical use of it in a not-yet-imagined future.
>>
>> Agreed. We can always add it later if we need it.
>>
>
> Attached patch gets rid of page conversion code.
>

Sorry, previous patch is incorrect..
Fixed version patch attached.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada

Attachment Content-Type Size
Remove_page_conversion_from_pg_upgrade_v2.patch binary/octet-stream 14.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2016-02-17 07:46:25 Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.
Previous Message Amit Langote 2016-02-17 07:40:51 Re: about google summer of code 2016