Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru@gmail.com>
Date: 2022-07-07T18:38:44Z
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 →
-
Revert recent changes to 002_pg_upgrade.pl.
- 6f7e7d0c482d 15.0 landed
- 87e22f675fd8 16.0 landed
-
Revise test case added in 43746996399541ecb5c7b188725a5f097c15ceae.
- d92f2bc0dae3 15.0 landed
- 212bdc0cbc32 16.0 landed
-
Use TRUNCATE to preserve relfilenode for pg_largeobject + index.
- bbe08b8869bd 16.0 landed
- 4ab5dae9472c 15.0 landed
-
Preserve relfilenode of pg_largeobject and its index across pg_upgrade.
- a2996478c32d 15.0 landed
- d498e052b4b8 16.0 landed
-
Have VACUUM warn on relfrozenxid "in the future".
- e83ebfe6d767 15.0 cited
-
Set relfrozenxid to oldest extant XID seen by VACUUM.
- 0b018fabaaba 15.0 cited
-
pg_upgrade: Preserve relfilenodes and tablespace OIDs.
- 9a974cbcba00 15.0 cited
-
Perform a lot more sanity checks when freezing tuples.
- 699bf7d05c68 11.0 cited
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 2:24 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 01:38:44PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 1:10 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote: > > > Maybe it's a good idea to check that the file is empty before unlinking... > > > > If we want to verify that there are no large objects in the cluster, > > we could do that in check_new_cluster_is_empty(). However, even if > > there aren't, the length of the file could still be more than 0, if > > there were some large objects previously and then they were removed. > > So it's not entirely obvious to me that we should refuse to remove a > > non-empty file. > > Uh, that initdb-created pg_largeobject file should not have any data in > it ever, as far as I know at that point in pg_upgrade. How would values > have gotten in there? Via pg_dump? I was thinking if the user had done it manually before running pg_upgrade. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com