-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/25/2015 11:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Joe Conway wrote: > >> Does anyone out there object to a non-backward compatible change >> to pg_controldata output? > > I don't (and thanks for taking care of it), but as I recall, > pg_upgrade reads and interprets pg_controldata output so it may > need adjustment too.
Thanks for the heads up. There are lots of controldata items pg_upgrade is interested in, but AFAICS none of these are included. Now maybe they should be, but they are not currently referenced. (Bruce added to the thread: we're talking about: "Current wal_level setting" "Current wal_log_hints setting" "Current max_connections setting" "Current max_worker_processes setting" "Current max_prepared_xacts setting" "Current max_locks_per_xact setting" "Current track_commit_timestamp setting" ) Joe - -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJV3MCnAAoJEDfy90M199hli+4P/1fTAXs1yiPga/5MPDoU8yuZ 8mHEvc+6fDXfkb8wk3GEiRjbhenhqkwFhLOBRDCWqKgzLT0rENp8fgm44gnNkim2 cGyz2ZOl5cqVqgZMziiLEhxlojbCLGKB8UOYM2176tBvkxx6NbhY8kjdaOoc6lXX 88n+PWaVdEwaIvYYMGfQjaxgVJxBJBBoRMNjYXhmgqBo3RNE0gwJfjEUNk7VzSnp w+tWrhgBIsHDyg12PnB/X3Wo5220N8rmN11ShDIUxhG5TJj3+u9W3iLB94lP8U2l hmdqsLkbYp5sptkYcFW1d3twOvJwqM0TIezLqTsHRWDtL2u0qOF6IGg9KsFBwbLg g6YcDUUw8UmrX3QmeytKzecbbvi2j1hg8h7kleWG86MwipbX2V1GHohBT3Ih2Srf Aw4poaYC94VKY+kKpMM+0901JOC064PguT/6Cud6QcujxGWrzzZJWmbbfXSlS+DZ 5xVco7e9XeYGQoA2CfhPiBZc1Mb7ZZYv1ptvK5NW64NQBlgrwQEwSa1YUkLvA+/Y mlCXgC8/w6A1QE4sRdQKzKqN1MRxcvnZKIVM/F0KepagIxU9IWUBh+qE98LjZWsM /02fyZPLt1COZnqDQSfGXdA7QgMLOm6Tfl0v3A7iv6qUT+hxiP5TonhPcJk2u0IM E81K2fX6gOcsdQGtqKql =nbOs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
