From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> So I think we should change pg_resetxlog -l option to take a WAL file >> name as argument, and fix pg_upgrade accordingly.
> Seems reasonable I guess. It's really specifying a starting WAL > location, but only to file granularity, so treating the argument as a > file name is sort of a type cheat but seems convenient. > If we do it that way, we'd better validate that the argument is a legal > WAL file name, so as to catch any cases where somebody tries to do it > old-style. > BTW, does pg_resetxlog's logic for setting the default -l value (from > scanning pg_xlog to find the largest existing file name) still work? It finds the segment number for largest existing file name from pg_xlog and then compare it with input provided by the user for -l Option, if input is greater it will use the input to set in control file. With Regards, Amit Kapila. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers