Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> The net behavior would be the same, but I thought it might be easier to >> code by thinking of it this way. Or maybe it wouldn't --- it's just a >> suggestion.
> Well, the difference is that if we just don't check it, there can > never be an error. Basically, it's the user's job to DTRT. If we > check it against some semi-arbitrary value, we'll catch the case where > the old cluster was modified with a custom setting and the new one was > not - but couldn't we also get false positives under obscure > circumstances? Huh? What we'd be checking is the LOBLKSIZE compiled into pg_upgrade versus that stored into pg_control by the new postmaster. If those are different, then pg_upgrade didn't come from the same build as the new postmaster, which is already a pretty hazardous situation (especially if the user is fooling with low-level stuff like this). regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers