Horton
Menu

Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects

Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>

View thread
From: Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-03-24T16:05:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On 3/24/21 12:04 PM, Jan Wieck wrote:
> In any case I changed the options so that they behave the same way, the
> existing -o and -O (for old/new postmaster options) work. I don't think
> it would be wise to have option forwarding work differently between
> options for postmaster and options for pg_dump/pg_restore.

Attaching the actual diff might help.

-- 
Jan Wieck
Principle Database Engineer
Amazon Web Services

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Count individual SQL commands in pg_restore's --transaction-size mode.

  2. Reduce number of commands dumpTableSchema emits for binary upgrade.

  3. Invent --transaction-size option for pg_restore.

  4. Rearrange pg_dump's handling of large objects for better efficiency.

  5. Add temporal PRIMARY KEY and UNIQUE constraints

  6. Fix typo and case in messages