On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 03:23:52PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote: > 2) There's no ability at all to revert, other than restore a backup. That > means if you pull the trigger and discover some major performance problem, > you have no choice but to deal with it (you can't switch back to the old > version without losing data).
In --link mode only > For many users those issues just don't matter; but in my work with financial > data it's why I've never actually used it. #2 especially was good to have > (in our case, via londiste). It also made it a lot easier to find > performance issues beforehand, by switching reporting replicas over to the > new version first. > > One other consideration is cut-over time. Swapping logical master and > replica can happen nearly instantly, while pg_upgrade needs some kind of > outage window. Right. I am thinking of writing some docs about how to avoid downtime for upgrades of various types. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
