| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Yuri Niyazov <yuri(at)academia(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade documentation improvement patch |
| Date: | 2016-10-10 00:24:51 |
| Message-ID: | 20161010002451.GA24598@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:36:30AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Yuri Niyazov <yuri(at)academia(dot)edu> wrote:
> > Should I update the documentation patch to instruct the use of
> > pg_controldata exclusively?
>
> I guess so. Marked as returned with feedback because the thread has died.
I did review this suggestion and concur that there just isn't enough
justification to list in the docs everything pg_upgrade checks for
compatibility, and a partial list might be worse than no list at all.
I agree it would be nice if we could somehow pull the initdb flags out
of a PGDATA and use them.
The good news is that pg_upgrade --check will do the verification and
report any problems, which might be why we have not seems this
complained about before.
--
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 | Robert Haas | 2016-10-10 01:43:52 | Re: Relids in upper relations |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-10-09 23:38:03 | Re: Macro customizable hashtable / bitmapscan & aggregation perf |