Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoaT_OMUjehQP8BvChV+5XJe3KUjiCLcad5NnvnQA5OkCA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
List pgsql-hackers
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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL/JSON: functions
Next
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_parameter_aclcheck() and trusted extensions