On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 13:42 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > Avoiding a scan before running pg_upgrade is just a performance > > optimisation. > > But using pg_upgrade AT ALL is also a performance optimization; in > fact AFAICS it's the only reason to use pg_upgrade. So if you take > that away there's no reason to use it at all.
I understand that the final process to switch from one release to another needs to be quick. Before that we can have any number of preparatory steps. One of those is backup, if you're sane. Another one should be a preparatory step that can be performed while the database is still on-line that checks that everything is in a good state for upgrade. No corruptions, no weird flags, everything good. If that last step is part of all upgrade procedures, including both minor and major we will all be happier and healthier. And the server can depend on that check and doesn't need to check itself for those weirdnesses from an earlier era. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
