From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers\(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Space reservation v02 |
Date: | 2009-01-30 16:56:51 |
Message-ID: | 87bpton358.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian píše v pá 30. 01. 2009 v 10:41 -0500:
>>> Well, I was thinking the new pg_class column would allow the upgrade to
>>> verify the pre-upgrade script was run properly, but a flat file works
>>> just as well if we assume we are going to pre-upgrade in one pass.
>>
>> Flat file or special table for pg_upgrade will work fine.
>
> Right, there's no difference in what you can achieve, whether you store the
> additional info in a flat file, special table or extra pg_class columns. If you
> can store something in pg_class, you can store it elsewhere just as well.
Well having a column in pg_class does have some advantages. Like, you could
look at the value from an sql session more easily. And if there are operations
which we know are unsafe -- such as adding columns -- we could clear it from
the server side easily.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's On-Demand Production Tuning
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-01-30 16:57:26 | Re: [PATCH] Space reservation v02 |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-01-30 16:54:15 | Re: mingw check hung |