| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: A recent message added to pg_upgade |
| Date: | 2023-11-11 00:16:22 |
| Message-ID: | ZU7H1t5AVHuxKByh@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 03:27:25PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> I don't think this comment is correct because there won't be any apply
> activity on the new cluster as after restoration subscriptions should
> be disabled. On the old cluster, I think one problem is that the
> origins may move forward after we copy them which can cause data
> inconsistency issues. The other is that we may not prefer to generate
> additional data and WAL during the upgrade. Also, I am not completely
> sure about using the word 'corruption' in this context.
What is your suggestion here? Would it be better to just aim for
simplicity and just say that we don't want it to run because "it can
lead to some inconsistent behaviors"?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-11-11 00:38:53 | Re: maybe a type_sanity. sql bug |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2023-11-11 00:03:16 | Why do indexes and sorts use the database collation? |