On 13.06.2011 22:33, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas<heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
On 13.06.2011 21:31, Tom Lane wrote:
So far as I can tell, that breaks pg_upgrade (if there are any open
prepared transactions) for no redeeming social benefit.
Surely pg_upgrade can't work anyway if there's any open prepared
transactions in the database. We're not going to guarantee to keep all
the data structures we write in two-phase state files unchanged over
major releases. If pg_upgrade is not checking for prepared transcations
at the moment, such a check should probably should be added.
No, pg_upgrade should not be unilaterally refusing that. The correct
way to deal with this consideration is to change the TWOPHASE_MAGIC
number when we make a change in on-disk 2PC state. Which wasn't done
in the SSI patch. We can either change that now, or undo the
unnecessary change in existing RM IDs. I vote for the latter.
Ok, I've renumbered the existing RMs back the way they were.
I nevertheless don't think it's worthwhile to try to migrate 2pc state
files in pg_upgrade. More than likely, it's a mistake on part of the
admin anyway if there is a prepared transaction open at that point.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
