Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På mandag 18. september 2017 kl. 16:28:07, skrev Bruce Momjian >: On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 11:36:40PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På lørdag 16. september 2017 kl. 18:34:51, skrev Bruce Momjian < > br...@momjian.us>: >     No.  If you ran

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 11:36:40PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På lørdag 16. september 2017 kl. 18:34:51, skrev Bruce Momjian < > br...@momjian.us>: > No.  If you ran initdb with --waldir on the new primary, you will create > a symbolic link in the PGDATA directory, and a

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På lørdag 16. september 2017 kl. 18:34:51, skrev Bruce Momjian >: On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 06:11:17PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I'm a little unsure what scenario we're trying to describe here. Copying the > pg_wal separately (for which

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 06:11:17PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I'm a little unsure what scenario we're trying to describe here. Copying the > pg_wal separately (for which there's no need optimizing for) is only needed if > you've moved it out of $PGDATA _after_ running pg_upgrade, IIUC.

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 03:12:50PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I talked with Stephen about this on IM. The issue is that if you don't > do --delete, and there are files in the primary that are not in the > standby, they are copied, but files in the standby and not in the > primary are kept.

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På lørdag 16. september 2017 kl. 17:24:14, skrev Bruce Momjian >: On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 01:23:45AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I tested upgrading from 9.6 to 10 now, using pg_upgrade, and pg_upgrade creates > the new data-dir with pg_wal

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 01:23:45AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I tested upgrading from 9.6 to 10 now, using pg_upgrade, and pg_upgrade > creates > the new data-dir with pg_wal "in it" (just like regular initdb), so pg_upgrade > seems not to care about where the old version's pg_xlog was.

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 09:21:25PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Michael, all, > > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh > > wrote: > > > I tested upgrading from 9.6 to 10 now, using pg_upgrade, and

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 01:23:45AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I tested upgrading from 9.6 to 10 now, using pg_upgrade, and pg_upgrade > creates > the new data-dir with pg_wal "in it" (just like regular initdb), so pg_upgrade > seems not to care about where the old version's pg_xlog was.

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

Michael, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > No, one of the baseline requirements of pg_upgrade is to *not* screw > > with the existing cluster. Removing its WAL or "cleaning it up" > > definitely

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > No, one of the baseline requirements of pg_upgrade is to *not* screw > with the existing cluster. Removing its WAL or "cleaning it up" > definitely seems like it's violating that principle. Not necessarily. Using

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

Michael, all, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh > wrote: > > I tested upgrading from 9.6 to 10 now, using pg_upgrade, and pg_upgrade > > creates the new data-dir with pg_wal "in it" (just like regular

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I tested upgrading from 9.6 to 10 now, using pg_upgrade, and pg_upgrade > creates the new data-dir with pg_wal "in it" (just like regular initdb), so > pg_upgrade seems not to care about where the old version's

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På torsdag 14. september 2017 kl. 21:13:56, skrev Bruce Momjian < br...@momjian.us >: On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 08:49:24PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: >     I think the tablespace example is clear enough to modify for WAL and we >     instruct them right below that

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 07:39:31PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 07:38:40PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > Further, really, I think we should provide a utility to do all of the > > above instead of using rsync- and that utility should do some additional > > things, such

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 08:49:24PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I think the tablespace example is clear enough to modify for WAL and we > instruct them right below that example to do WAL. > >   > Well, it's not following the exact same structure as there's no > "version-directory"

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:16:33PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Bruce, > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > > I have applied the attached patch to show examples of using rsync on > > PGDATA and tablespaces, documented that rsync is only useful when in > > link mode, and explained more

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På torsdag 14. september 2017 kl. 20:39:34, skrev Bruce Momjian < br...@momjian.us >: On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 04:31:09PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På onsdag 13. september 2017 kl. 15:26:27, skrev Bruce Momjian < > br...@momjian.us>: > >     On Wed, Sep 13,

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 04:31:09PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På onsdag 13. september 2017 kl. 15:26:27, skrev Bruce Momjian < > br...@momjian.us>: > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 01:35:17AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > [snip] > > I know I'm being a little nitty-gritty

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 07:38:40PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Further, really, I think we should provide a utility to do all of the > above instead of using rsync- and that utility should do some additional > things, such as: > > - Check that the control file on the primary and replica show

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

Bruce, * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > I have applied the attached patch to show examples of using rsync on > PGDATA and tablespaces, documented that rsync is only useful when in > link mode, and explained more clearly how rsync handles links. You can > see the results here: > >

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På onsdag 13. september 2017 kl. 15:26:27, skrev Bruce Momjian >: On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 01:35:17AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: [snip] > I know I'm being a little nitty-gritty here, but if it helps me understand it > might help others. I

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 01:35:17AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På onsdag 13. september 2017 kl. 01:00:20, skrev Bruce Momjian < > br...@momjian.us>: > (I know this isn't exactly -hackers food, but it seems natural to end this > thread here) >   > Ok, thanks. > It is clearer what happens

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 07:54:15PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Andreas, > > * Andreas Joseph Krogh (andr...@visena.com) wrote: > > I have to ask; Why not run pg_upgrade on standby, after verifying that it's > > in > > sync with primary and promoting it to primary if necessary and then making

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På onsdag 13. september 2017 kl. 01:54:15, skrev Stephen Frost < sfr...@snowman.net >: Andreas, * Andreas Joseph Krogh (andr...@visena.com) wrote: > I have to ask; Why not run pg_upgrade on standby, after verifying that it's in > sync with primary and promoting it

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

Andreas, * Andreas Joseph Krogh (andr...@visena.com) wrote: > I have to ask; Why not run pg_upgrade on standby, after verifying that it's > in > sync with primary and promoting it to primary if necessary and then making it > standby again after pg_upgrade is finished? I don't think that we

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På onsdag 13. september 2017 kl. 01:38:40, skrev Stephen Frost < sfr...@snowman.net >: Bruce, all, [snip] Further, really, I think we should provide a utility to do all of the above instead of using rsync- and that utility should do some additional things, such as:

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

Bruce, all, * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:40:32AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > På tirsdag 12. september 2017 kl. 23:52:02, skrev Bruce Momjian < > > br...@momjian.us>: > > > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 08:59:05PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På onsdag 13. september 2017 kl. 01:00:20, skrev Bruce Momjian >: On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:40:32AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På tirsdag 12. september 2017 kl. 23:52:02, skrev Bruce Momjian < > br...@momjian.us>: > >     On Tue, Sep 12,

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:40:32AM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På tirsdag 12. september 2017 kl. 23:52:02, skrev Bruce Momjian < > br...@momjian.us>: > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 08:59:05PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > >     Improvements? > > > > Thanks, that

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På tirsdag 12. september 2017 kl. 23:52:02, skrev Bruce Momjian < br...@momjian.us >: On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 08:59:05PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: >     Improvements? > > Thanks, that certainly improves things. > But; I still find the rsync-command in f)

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 08:59:05PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > Improvements? > > Thanks, that certainly improves things. > But; I still find the rsync-command in f) confusing; > 1. Why --size-only? From rsync manual: "skip files that match in size", is > this > safe?? > 2. Why is

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På tirsdag 12. september 2017 kl. 21:11:45, skrev Robert Haas < robertmh...@gmail.com >: On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > There are many ways to do/configure things it seems, resulting in many ifs > and buts which

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > There are many ways to do/configure things it seems, resulting in many ifs > and buts which makes section 10 rather confusing. I really think a complete > example, with absolute paths, would be clarifying. > > I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

På tirsdag 12. september 2017 kl. 19:19:22, skrev Bruce Momjian < br...@momjian.us >: On Thu, Aug  3, 2017 at 11:37:32AM +0200, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:35 AM,

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:37:32AM +0200, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh > > wrote: > >> I'm reading

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh > wrote: >> I'm reading https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgupgrade.html to try >> to understand how to upgrade standby-servers using

Re: [HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > I'm reading https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgupgrade.html to try > to understand how to upgrade standby-servers using pg_upgrade with pg10. > > The text in step 10 sais: > "You will not be running

[HACKERS] Clarification in pg10's pgupgrade.html step 10 (upgrading standby servers)

Hi -hackers.   I'm reading https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgupgrade.html to try to understand how to upgrade standby-servers using pg_upgrade with pg10.   The text in step 10 sais: "You will not be running pg_upgrade on the standby servers, but rather rsync", which to me sounds like