Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables
Date: 2012-11-12 21:14:59
Message-ID: 20121112211459.GC12157@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian escribió:

> --- 17,24 ----
>
> static void transfer_single_new_db(pageCnvCtx *pageConverter,
> FileNameMap *maps, int size);
> ! static int transfer_relfile(pageCnvCtx *pageConverter, FileNameMap *map,
> ! const char *suffix);

Uh, does this code assume that forks other than the main one are not
split in segments? I think that's a bug, is it not?

--

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2012-11-12 21:22:33 Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2012-11-12 21:11:22 Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables