* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On 2015-01-23 14:27:51 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > > On 2015-01-23 14:05:10 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > > If I follow what you're suggesting, pg_upgrade would > > > > need a new 'in-place' mode that removes all of the catalog tables from > > > > the old cluster and puts the new catalog tables into place and leaves > > > > everything else alone. > > > > > > No. Except that it'd preserve the relfilenodes (i.e. the filenames of > > > relations) it'd work exactly the same as today. The standby is simply > > > updated by rsyncing the new data directory of the primary to the > > > standby. > > > > You'd have to replace the existing data directory on the master to do > > that, which pg_upgrade was designed specifically to not do, in case > > things went poorly. > > Why? Just rsync the new data directory onto the old directory on the > standbys. That's fine and simple.
That still doesn't address the need to use --size-only, it would just
mean that you don't need to use -H. If anything the -H part is the
aspect which worries me the least about this approach.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
