On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 06:49:10PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 03:46:48PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 3:30 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > Yes, I can, though it seems like a much bigger issue than pg_upgrade. > > > I will be glad to dig into it. > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by that. Technically this would be an issue > > for any program that uses "pg_resetwal -x" in the way that pg_upgrade > > does, with those same expectations. But isn't pg_upgrade the only > > known program that behaves like that? > > > > I don't see any reason why this wouldn't be treated as a pg_upgrade > > bug in the release notes, regardless of the exact nature or provenance > > of the issue -- the pg_upgrade framing seems useful because this is a > > practical problem for pg_upgrade users alone. Have I missed something? > > My point is that there are a lot internals involved here that are not > part of pg_upgrade, though it probably only affects pg_upgrade. Anyway, > Bertrand patch seems to have what I need.
One question is how do we want to handle cases where -x next_xid is used but -u oldestXid is not used? Compute a value for oldestXid like we did previously? Throw an error? Leave oldestXid unchanged? I am thinking the last option. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
