回复:pg_rewind fails with in-place tablespace

From: "Rui Zhao" <xiyuan(dot)zr(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>
To: "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Thomas Munro" <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: 回复:pg_rewind fails with in-place tablespace
Date: 2023-07-31 02:07:44
Message-ID: 3baffa79-939b-4c65-b273-1b40944c0e2d.xiyuan.zr@alibaba-inc.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Sorry for the delay in responding to this matter as I have been waiting for another similar subject to approved by a moderator.
Upon review, I am satisfied with the proposed solution and believe that checking absolute path is better than hard coding with "pg_tblspc/". I think we have successfully resolved this issue in the pg_rewind case.
However, I would like to bring your attention to another issue: pg_upgrade fails with in-place tablespace. Another issue is still waiting for approved. I have tested all the tools in src/bin with in-place tablespace, and I believe this is the final issue.
Thank you for your understanding and assistance.
Best regard,
Rui Zhao
------------------------------------------------------------------
发件人:Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
发送时间:2023年7月31日(星期一) 06:49
收件人:赵锐(惜元) <xiyuan(dot)zr(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>
抄 送:pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>; Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
主 题:Re: pg_rewind fails with in-place tablespace
On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 04:54:56PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I am finishing with the attached. Thoughts?
Applied this one as bf22792 on HEAD, without a backpatch as in-place
tablespaces are around for developers. If there are opinions in favor
of a backpatch, feel free of course.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2023-07-31 02:14:13 Re: 回复:pg_rewind fails with in-place tablespace
Previous Message Peter Smith 2023-07-31 01:46:24 Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field