|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|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
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
>> 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
|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|