| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects |
| Date: | 2025-04-09 17:16:44 |
| Message-ID: | Z_arfJajI7RPt7ZJ@nathan |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 01:51:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 01:36:58PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Hmm ... one annoying thing for this project is that AFAICS pg_upgrade
>>> does *not* preserve database OIDs, which is problematic for using
>>> COPY to load pg_shdepend rows.
>
>> I think it does; see commit aa01051.
>
> Ah --- I thought I remembered something having been done about that,
> but I failed to find it because I was looking in pg_upgrade not
> pg_dump. Too bad aa01051 didn't update the comment at the top of
> pg_upgrade.c.
I'll apply the attached patch to fix the comment shortly.
--
nathan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-Mention-that-we-preserve-database-OIDs-in-pg_upgr.patch | text/plain | 1.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-04-09 17:17:32 | Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-04-09 17:10:09 | Re: Add missing PGDLLIMPORT markings |