Re: 15 pg_upgrade with -j - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Peter J. Holzer
Subject Re: 15 pg_upgrade with -j
Date
Msg-id 20230523203305.o4oahw2zpyxs4nju@hjp.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 15 pg_upgrade with -j  (Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On 2023-05-23 13:17:24 -0500, Ron wrote:
> On 5/23/23 12:19, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > On 2023-05-22 21:10:48 -0500, Ron wrote:
> > > On 5/22/23 18:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > It looks like the assumption was that issuing link()
                                                      ^^^^^^
> > > > requests in parallel wouldn't help much but just swamp your disk
> > > > if they're all on the same filesystem.
> > > > Maybe that could use rethinking, not sure.
> > > It does need rethinking in the era of VMs and SANs. /var/lib/pgsql/15 is
> > > going to be on a different LUN from /var/lib/pgsql/9.6
> > You can't hardlink between different file systems.
>
> We'd never hardlink.

But that was what Jeff and Tom were talking about. If you are changing
the subject you should at least make it explicit.

        hp

--
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) |                    |
| |   | hjp@hjp.at         |    -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |       challenge!"

Attachment

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Christoph Moench-Tegeder
Date:
Subject: Re: 15 pg_upgrade with -j
Next
From: Ron
Date:
Subject: Re: 15 pg_upgrade with -j