Horton
Menu

Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects

Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>

View thread
From: Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, "Kumar, Sachin" <ssetiya@amazon.com>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan@gmail.com>, Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-03-27T10:54:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Hi,

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 10:53:51AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-03-27 at 10:20 +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > Also, is there a chance this is going to be back-patched? I guess it
> > would be enough if the ugprade target is v17 so it is less of a concern,
> > but it would be nice if people with millions of large objects are not
> > stuck until they are ready to ugprade to v17.
> 
> It is a quite invasive patch, and it adds new features (pg_restore in
> bigger transaction patches), so I think this is not for backpatching,
> desirable as it may seem from the usability angle.

Right, I forgot about those changes, makes sense.


Michael

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