On 24 May 2012 23:02, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 09:52:30AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: >> Having pg_upgrade touch data files is both dangerous and difficult to >> back out in case of mistake, so I am wary of putting the metapage at >> block 0. Doing it the way I suggest means the .meta files would be >> wholly new and can be deleted as a back-out. We can also clean away >> any unnecessary .vm/.fsm files as a later step. > > Pg_upgrade never modifies the old cluster, except to lock it in link > mode, so there is never anything to back out.
Agreed. Robert's proposal was to make pg_upgrade modify the cluster, which I was observing wasn't a good plan. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
