Hi, On 2022-03-31 16:14:25 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: > 1) Do we need to do something about pg_upgrade? I mean, we did not have > unlogged sequences until now, so existing databases may have unlogged > tables with logged sequences. If people run pg_upgrade, what should be > the end result? Should it convert the sequences to unlogged ones, should > it fail and force the user to fix this manually, or what?
> 2) Does it actually make sense to force owned sequences to have the same > relpersistence as the table? I can imagine use cases where it's OK to > discard and recalculate the data, but I'd still want to ensure unique > IDs. Like some data loads, for example. I agree it makes sense to have logged sequences with unlogged tables. We should call out the behavioural change somewhere prominent in the release notes. I don't think we should make pg_upgrade change the loggedness of sequences. Greetings, Andres Freund
