On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 03:55:02PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:28:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > > > Uh, I think pg_upgrade needs to check that they match too. > > > > > > Possibly. What do you think it should do when examining a pg_control > > > version that lacks the field? > > > > Good question. I have existing cases where fields were removed, but not > > ones that were added. As we have no way to query the old cluster's > > value for LOBLKSIZE, I think I will just add code to compare them if > > they _both_ exist. > > Can't you compare it to the historic default value? I mean, add an > assumption that people thus far has never tweaked it.
Well, if they did tweak it, then they would be unable to use pg_upgrade because it would complain about a mismatch if they actually matched the old and new servers. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
