Horton

Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

View thread
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Tom Kincaid <tomjohnkincaid@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2021-08-26T15:48:40Z
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 →

  1. Rethink method for assigning OIDs to the template0 and postgres DBs.

  2. pg_upgrade: Preserve database OIDs.

  3. pg_upgrade: Preserve relfilenodes and tablespace OIDs.

  4. Fix for new Boolean node

  5. Improve error handling of HMAC computations

  6. Add macro RelationIsPermanent() to report relation permanence

  7. Enhance nbtree index tuple deletion.

On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:36:51AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> * Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:00:47AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > Anyone see a flaw in that analysis?
> > 
> > I am still waiting to hear the purpose of this preservation.  As long as
> > you don't apply the patch, I guess I will just stop asking.
> 
> I'm a bit confused why this question keeps coming up as we've discussed
> multiple reasons (incremental backups, possible use for TDE which would

I have not seen much explaination on pgBackRest, except me mentioning
it.  Is this something really useful?

As far as TDE, I haven't seen any concrete plan for that, so why add
this code for that reason?

> make this required, general improved sanity when working with pg_upgrade
> is frankly a benefit in its own right too...).  If the additional code

How?  I am not aware of any advantage except cosmetic.

> was a huge burden or even a moderate one then that might be an argument
> against, but it hardly sounds like it will be given Robert's thorough
> analysis so far and the (admittedly not complete, but not that far from
> it based on the DB OID review) proposed patch.

I am find to add it if it is minor, but I want to see the calculus of
its value vs complexity, which I have not seen spelled out.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.