On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 03:41:05PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Greetings, > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > > After talking to Joe Conway, I just want to mention that if we decide > > that the LSN is unique among heap and index, or among heap or index, we > > will need to make sure future WAL records retain this uniqueness. > > One thing comes to mind regarding this and I'll admit that I don't quite > remember exactly off-hand but I also don't want to not mention it now > and forget to later. > > What about pg_upgrade?
So, we don't carry WAL from the old cluster to the new cluster, so if the WAL is changed and had duplicates, it would only be new WAL records. pg_upgrade seems immune to must of this, and that is by design. However, I am hesitant to change the heap/index page format for encryption because if we add fields, old pages might not fit as encrypted pages, and then you have to move rows around, and things become _much_ more complicated. I don't see any other pg_upgrade issues, unless someone else does. Oh, we will have to check pg_control for a matching encryption format. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
