Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Kevin Grittner <kevin.grittner@wicourts.gov>, david <david@fetter.org>, aidan <aidan@highrise.ca>, stark <stark@mit.edu>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-02-29T21:53:18Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Wakeup WALWriter as needed for asynchronous commit performance.
- 4de82f7d7c50 9.2.0 cited
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mié feb 29 18:34:27 -0300 2012: > > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > > <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> The utility would run in the old cluster before upgrading, so the the flag > >> would have to be present in the old version. pg_upgrade would check that the > >> flag is set, refusing to upgrade if it isn't, with an error like "please run > >> pre-upgrade utility first". > > > I find that a pretty unappealing design; it seems to me it'd be much > > easier to make the new cluster cope with everything. > > Easier for who? I don't care for the idea of code that has to cope with > two page formats, or before long N page formats, because if we don't > have some mechanism like this then we will never be able to decide that > an old data format is safely dead. .. in fact this is precisely what killed Zdenek Kotala's idea of upgrading. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support