On Tue, Sep 22, 2026, at 1:25 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 09:10:44AM -0700, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: >> Even if core drops them automatically, having pg_upgrade deal with >> them is useful on its own IMHO, since the upgrade could start before >> that happens. So, I prefer pg_upgrade skipping them without any >> option, emitting info about the skipped ones, which will not happen >> often in practice once core handles the drop. > > Yeah, I think we should do both. Automatic deletion is probably the best > thing to do to handle leftover invalid databases, but as you say we can't > rely on that happening before someone upgrades. >
... or add a detailed error message to pg_upgrade saying that autovacuum or a custom worker will remove the invalid databases in the next round. I don't like the idea of having duplicate functionality. You might have to deal with a race condition if pg_upgrade and autovacuum decide to act at the same time. -- Euler Taveira EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/
