On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 02:34:26PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 2:16 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > One other issue --- the more that pg_upgrade preserves, the more likely > > pg_upgrade will break when some internal changes happen in Postgres. > > Therefore, if you want pg_upgrade to preserve something, you have to > > have a good reason --- even code simplicity might not be a sufficient > > reason. > > While I accept that as a general principle, I don't think it's really > applicable in this case. pg_upgrade already knows all about > relfilenodes; it has a source file called relfilenode.c. I don't see > that a pg_upgrade that preserves relfilenodes is any more or less > likely to break in the future than a pg_upgrade that renumbers all the > files so that the relation OID and the relfilenode are equal. You've > got about the same amount of reliance on the on-disk layout either > way.
I was making more of a general statement that preservation can be problematic and its impact must be researched. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
