Re: BUG #14304: WAL files pg_upgrade

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: furlongs(at)osti(dot)gov
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #14304: WAL files pg_upgrade
Date: 2016-08-30 15:54:04
Message-ID: 20160830155404.GC21961@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 03:41:41PM +0000, furlongs(at)osti(dot)gov wrote:
> The following bug has been logged on the website:
>
> Bug reference: 14304
> Logged by: Shane Furlong
> Email address: furlongs(at)osti(dot)gov
> PostgreSQL version: 9.4.9
> Operating system: centOS
> Description:
>
> My shop is running PostgreSQL 9.0 and pg_upgrading to 9.4.
>
> Currently WAL files are saved in a location /pgsql/archive.
>
> New WAL files will be stored in location /pgsql/archive94.
>
> My question is how does pg_upgrade handle WAL files. It looks like to me
> that pg_upgrade only addresses the data directory and not the archive
> directory.
>
> Is it necessary to flush all 9.0 WAL files prior to running pg_upgrade? Or
> would one just copy the WAL files from the previous location to the new
> location?
>
> Any help or direction you can supply would be greatly appreciated.

pg_upgrade does _nothing_ with WAL. It does not copy it from the old
cluster to the new cluster, nor does it interact with the archive
directory.

I do recommend you use a _different_ directory to store the WAL after
the ugprade so the WAL file names don't conflict --- seems you are
already doing that. :-)

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

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kaijiang Chen 2016-08-31 04:02:20 Re: BUG #14302: SQL with LIMIT degrades performance seriously
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2016-08-30 15:45:20 Re: BUG #14302: SQL with LIMIT degrades performance seriously