Re: Assistance Needed: Issue with pg_upgrade and --link option - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pradeep Kumar
Subject Re: Assistance Needed: Issue with pg_upgrade and --link option
Date
Msg-id CAJ4xhPnax1SCe9chTUak9wmg1aQhD2s+u6NcEJ2pEy8w_4iWdA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Assistance Needed: Issue with pg_upgrade and --link option  (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
This is my numbers.
 df  ~/pradeep_test/pg_upgrade_testing/postgres_11.4/master ~/pradeep_test/pg_upgrade_testing/postgres_14/new_pg
Filesystem                  1K-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/nvme0n1p4_crypt 375161856 102253040 270335920  28% /home
/dev/mapper/nvme0n1p4_crypt 375161856 102253040 270335920  28% /home

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:14 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
On 28.06.23 08:24, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-06-28 at 11:49 +0530, Pradeep Kumar wrote:
>> I was under the impression that the --link option would create hard links between the
>> old and new cluster's data files, but it appears that the entire old cluster data was
>> copied to the new cluster, resulting in a significant increase in the new cluster's size.
>
> Please provide some numbers, ideally
>
>    du -sk <old_data_directory> <new_data_directory>

I don't think you can observe the effects of the --link option this way.
  It would just give you the full size count for both directories, even
though the point to the same underlying inodes.

To see the effect, you could perhaps use `df` to see how much overall
disk space the upgrade step eats up.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pradeep Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: Assistance Needed: Issue with pg_upgrade and --link option
Next
From: Laurenz Albe
Date:
Subject: Re: Assistance Needed: Issue with pg_upgrade and --link option