From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade |
Date: | 2022-07-07 18:24:04 |
Message-ID: | YsckxPjKlGcTB50j@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 01:38:44PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 1:10 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
> > Maybe it's a good idea to check that the file is empty before unlinking...
>
> If we want to verify that there are no large objects in the cluster,
> we could do that in check_new_cluster_is_empty(). However, even if
> there aren't, the length of the file could still be more than 0, if
> there were some large objects previously and then they were removed.
> So it's not entirely obvious to me that we should refuse to remove a
> non-empty file.
Uh, that initdb-created pg_largeobject file should not have any data in
it ever, as far as I know at that point in pg_upgrade. How would values
have gotten in there? Via pg_dump?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-07-07 18:35:00 | Re: SQL/JSON: functions |
Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-07-07 18:22:51 | Re: remove more archiving overhead |