Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
Date: 2010-06-04 18:43:20
Message-ID: AANLkTimc6f2ucWAfHi-4ilP29cQhIhnJCGJJsVl3pPLj@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
>> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC --- bump on incompatible change in WAL contents
>
>> How can I get that from an existing data directory? I don't see it in
>> pg_controldata output (unless it has a non-obvious alias).
>
> You'd need to pull it out of one of the WAL files.  I'm not sure it's
> worth the trouble ...

Urgh, no. Probably not.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-06-04 19:33:29 Re: [PATCH] Fix leaky VIEWs for RLS
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-06-04 18:30:29 Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?