| From: | Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hüseyin Demir <huseyin(dot)d3r(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bohyun Lee <bohyun(dot)lee(at)databricks(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] pg_upgrade: add --initdb option to create the new cluster automatically |
| Date: | 2026-08-13 14:45:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAKAnmmLskGy4GUbogLuoywLfhnq=khNdACj5NpvpLEaed-yQUw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 9:28 AM Hüseyin Demir <huseyin(dot)d3r(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> When I run the pg_upgrade command with the following options I'd
> expect it to not create a directory and initdb.
>
> ```
> pg_upgrade --check --initdb -d /old -D /new
> ```
>
I see your point. Maybe we don't allow --check with --initdb at all?
also mention that -B flag points outs to target version correctly
> since there is a risk of doing an initdb with the wrong version. If -B
> points to an older version, pg_upgrade may create the wrong cluster.
>
I'm not clear what pointing this out for --initdb only accomplishes. A
wrong -B is going to cause problems regardless of the mode.
And the --initdb behaviour will introduce additional risks during the
> upgrade. During the initdb the settings discovery connections are
> allowed on database level and we don't have a guarantee that
> checkpoint and vacuums won't start. This needs to be documented
> clearly or we should consider eliminating them.
>
Eliminating what exactly? And why would a vacuum or checkpoint cause
problems?
Cheers,
Greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marcos Pegoraro | 2026-08-13 14:50:40 | Re: Correct some doc items due to the REPACK |
| Previous Message | Pierre Forstmann | 2026-08-13 14:23:29 | Re: [PATCH] Add planner support function to two-argument regexp_like() |