Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYVwXhYe6--rpyAjJ8MDv1RjHJ64=_xD01pg9vKgxuO=g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)  (Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 12:42 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Actually though ... I've not read the patch, but what does it do about
> the fact that the postgres and template0 DBs do not have stable OIDs?
> I cannot imagine any way to force those to match across PG versions
> that would not be an unsustainable crock.

Well, it's interesting that you mention that, because there's a
comment in the patch that probably has to do with this:

+    /*
+     * Make sure that pg_upgrade does not change database OID. Don't care
+     * about "postgres" database, backend will assign it fixed OID anyway.
+     * ("template1" has fixed OID too but the value 1 should not collide with
+     * any other OID so backend pays no attention to it.)
+     */

I wasn't able to properly understand that comment, and to be honest
I'm not sure I precisely understand your concern either. I don't quite
see why the template0 database matters. I think that database isn't
going to be dumped, or restored, so as far as pg_upgrade is concerned
it might as well not exist in either cluster, and I don't see why
pg_upgrade can't therefore just ignore it completely. But template1
and postgres are another matter. If I understand correctly, those
databases are going to be created in the new cluster by initdb, but
then pg_upgrade is going to populate them with data - including
relation files - from the old cluster. And, yeah, I don't see how we
could make those database OIDs match, which is not great.

To be honest, what I'd be inclined to do about that is just nail down
those OIDs for future releases. In fact, I'd probably go so far as to
hardcode that in such a way that even if you drop those databases and
recreate them, they get recreated with the same hard-coded OID. Now
that doesn't do anything to create stability when people upgrade from
an old release to a current one, but I don't really see that as an
enormous problem. The only hard requirement for this feature is if we
use the database OID for some kind of encryption or integrity checking
or checksum type feature. Then, you want to avoid having the database
OID change when you upgrade, so that the encryption or integrity check
or checksum in question does not have to be recomputed for every page
as part of pg_upgrade. But, that only matters if you're going between
two releases that support that feature, which will not be the case if
you're upgrading from some old release. Apart from that kind of
feature, it still seems like a nice-to-have to keep database OIDs the
same, but if those cases end up as exceptions, oh well.

Does that seem reasonable, or am I missing something big?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: The Free Space Map: Problems and Opportunities
Next
From: "alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org"
Date:
Subject: Re: archive status ".ready" files may be created too early