From: | Patrick Dung <patrick_dkt(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)hk> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Major upgrade of PostgreSQL and MySQL |
Date: | 2013-09-13 17:08:37 |
Message-ID: | 1379092117.12504.YahooMailNeo@web193506.mail.sg3.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
________________________________
From: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2013 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Major upgrade of PostgreSQL and MySQL
Patrick Dung wrote on 13.09.2013 18:17:
>> The problem of pg_upgrade is that it needed to hold two set of databases data in the server.
>> This is not be desirable (very slow) or possible (space limitation) for database with huge data.
>>
>> For example, if the old version is already using over 50% of the mount point.
>> The new database may not have enough disk space for the upgrading.
> I think if you use the --link parameter, you don't need additional disk space (or only little).
Thanks for pointing out.
For small or medium sized database, I think file based snapshot (like ZFS) could create backup of the old database quickly.
Also it can rollback quickly.
Thanks,
Patrick
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2013-09-13 17:13:44 | Re: Major upgrade of PostgreSQL and MySQL |
Previous Message | Patrick Dung | 2013-09-13 17:04:32 | Re: Major upgrade of PostgreSQL and MySQL |