On 2014-06-18 13:54:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 2014-06-18 13:24:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> >>> On 2014-06-18 12:51:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>>> Another angle is that some folks might have tried to automate things
> >>>> even more, with a wrapper script that starts up the new postmaster
> >>>> and runs analyze_new_cluster.sh all by itself. I guess they could
> >>>> make the wrapper do "vacuumdb --all --analyze-in-stages" directly,
> >>>> though, so maybe that's not a fatal objection either.
>
> >>> Wouldn't that be quite counterproductive? The reason we don't normally
> >>> do that and why --analyze-in-stages exists is that the cluster should be
> >>> started up as fast as possible. Restarting it after ANALYZE went through
> >>> would be defeating that purpose, no?
>
> >> How so? Once you've started the postmaster, you're open for business,
> >> no?
>
> > Wasn't there lots of talk about making the server inaccessible while
> > pg_upgrade is doing its thing? Also, many people are desparately unhappy
> > if postgres has to be restarted (to return to be being OS managed) after
> > their application already has connected.
>
> I think we're not on the same page. My point is that someone might want
> to automate the whole sequence: stop old postmaster, run pg_upgrade, start
> the updated postmaster normally (hence it *is* open for business), kick
> off the analyze runs. If you're concerned about minimal downtime you
> would not want to be waiting around for the admin to issue a perfectly
> predictable series of commands.
Oh, yea. Definitely. I think that's what I've seen happen in pretty much
*all* usages of pg_upgrade. I somehow misread that you wanted to add
that into pg_upgrade. Not really sure how, sorry.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
