Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Kincaid <tomjohnkincaid(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)
Date: 2021-08-24 00:29:09
Message-ID: 20210824002909.GA18095@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 04:57:31PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 1:36 PM Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Thanks Robert for your comments.
> > I have split the patch into two portions. One that handles DB OID and
> > the other that
> > handles tablespace OID and relfilenode OID.
>
> It's pretty clear from the discussion, I think, that the database OID
> one is going to need rework to be considered.

I assume this patch is not going to be applied until there is an actual
use case for preserving these values.

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

If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2021-08-24 00:51:43 Re: [BUG] wrong refresh when ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ADD/DROP PUBLICATION
Previous Message Bossart, Nathan 2021-08-24 00:03:37 Re: .ready and .done files considered harmful