Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade -u

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Ray Stell <stellr(at)vt(dot)edu>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade -u
Date: 2013-05-29 02:55:20
Message-ID: 20130529025520.GA12969@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:05:57PM -0400, Ray Stell wrote:
> > However, if we pass these items into the scripts, we then force
> > these values to be used, even if the user wants to use a different
> > value. It is a balance between supplying defaults vs. requiring the
> > user to supply or change the values used during the ugprade.
> >
> > At this point, I have favored _not_ supplying defaults in the
> > script. Do you have an alternative argument in favor of supplying
> > defaults?
>
>
>
> Well, the story really began when I ran initdb with a -U arg. vacuumdb
> takes the -U also, but pg_upgrade does not.
>
> It seems like if I have to supply a -u in order to get pg_upgrade
> to function in the case where there is no default superuser in the
> cluster, then an associated vacuumdb command requires a -U arg.
>
> Perhaps just documenting the behavior is all that is needed, but -U is
> everywhere and I think that's a good thing.

[ moved to hacker ]

Wow, I never realized other tools used -U for user, instead of -u.
Should I change pg_upgrade to use -U for 9.4? I can keep supporting -u
as an undocumented option.

I have applied the attached patch to document that you might need to set
connection parameters for vacuumdb.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

Attachment Content-Type Size
options.diff text/x-diff 829 bytes

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2013-05-29 04:08:03 Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade -u
Previous Message Dimitar Misev 2013-05-28 21:53:38 BLOB updates -> database size explodes

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2013-05-29 03:50:15 Re: Planning incompatibilities for Postgres 10.0
Previous Message Greg Smith 2013-05-29 02:10:54 Re: fallocate / posix_fallocate for new WAL file creation (etc...)