| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: file cloning in pg_upgrade and CREATE DATABASE |
| Date: | 2018-10-18 21:59:00 |
| Message-ID: | d4bc3dae-fdea-2407-5629-cac68be893a3@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/10/2018 16:50, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 10/10/2018 21:50, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> I see. Peter is proposing to have a fourth mode, essentially
>>> --transfer-mode=clone-or-copy.
>>
>> Uh, if you use --link, and the two data directories are on different
>> file systems, it fails. No one has ever asked for link-or-copy, so why
>> are we considering clone-or-copy? Are we going to need
>> link-or-clone-or-copy too? I do realize that clone and copy have
>> non-destructive behavior on the old cluster once started, so it does
>> make some sense to merge them, unlike link.
>
> I'm OK to get rid of the clone-or-copy mode. I can see the confusion.
New patch that removes all the various reflink modes and adds a new
option --clone that works similar to --link. I think it's much cleaner now.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v6-0001-pg_upgrade-Allow-use-of-file-cloning.patch | text/plain | 14.7 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-10-18 23:26:39 | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-10-18 21:10:02 | Re: Making all nbtree entries unique by having heap TIDs participate in comparisons |