* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 09:45:11PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > Or preserve it as-is. I don't really like the 'make them fix it' > > option, as a user could run into that in the middle of a planned upgrade > > that had been tested and never had that come up. > > They would get the warning during pg_upgrade --check, of course.
Sure, if they happened to have a concurrent index creation going when
they ran the check... But what if they didn't and it only happened to
happen during the actual pg_upgrade? I'm still not thrilled with this
idea of making the user have to abort in the middle to address something
that, really, isn't a big deal to just preserve and deal with later...
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
