From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_migrator issues |
Date: | 2010-01-04 19:30:22 |
Message-ID: | 241.1262633422@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> I was just really asking if disallowing pg_resetxlog -n on a live server
> is planned behavior or an oversight. I can see the logic that it should
> be disallowed but I am just looking for confirmation from someone and I
> can then drop the issue.
Well, it's not only a matter of "are we going to clobber live state",
it's also "is the state that we are looking at changing under us?".
The -n switch only covers the first point. I think it would require
some careful analysis, and testing that's never been done, before having
any confidence in the results of pg_resetxlog on a live server.
Why should you need this anyway? pg_migrator should not be having to
run pg_resetxlog on the old installation, I would think.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-04 19:32:56 | Re: ECPG SQLDA support |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-04 19:17:19 | Re: patch - per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost |