Re: Prototype: In-place upgrade v02

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Prototype: In-place upgrade v02
Date: 2008-09-07 17:45:37
Message-ID: 87y723yhmm.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:

> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I didn't see anything that looked like an immediate change in user table
>> contents, unless they used the "name" type; but what of relation forks?
>
> Relation forks didn't change anything inside relation files, so no scanning of
> relations is required because of that. Neither will the FSM rewrite. Not sure
> about DSM yet.

And just to confirm -- they don't change the name of the files the postmaster
expects to find in its data directory, right?

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2008-09-07 17:55:12 Re: Prototype: In-place upgrade v02
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2008-09-07 17:39:01 Re: [HACKERS] New shapshot RPMs (Sep 7 2008) are ready for testing