| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes |
| Date: | 2012-12-07 03:07:02 |
| Message-ID: | 20121207030702.GB31540@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 09:45:11PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andrew Dunstan (andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net) wrote:
> > So we'll lose the index definition and leave some files behind? This
> > sounds a bit messy to say the least.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > Making the user fix it seems much more sensible to me. Otherwise I
> > suspect we'll find users who get strangely surprised when they can
> > no longer find any trace of an expected index in their upgraded
> > database.
>
> Or preserve it as-is. I don't really like the 'make them fix it'
> option, as a user could run into that in the middle of a planned upgrade
> that had been tested and never had that come up.
They would get the warning during pg_upgrade --check, of course.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-12-07 03:07:34 | Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-12-07 03:06:17 | Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes |