| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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 +
| 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 |