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. > You'd still have to deal with the tablespace directories being renamed > also, since we include the major version and catalog build in the > directory name.. True. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
