Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade vs. pg_ctl stop -m fast - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade vs. pg_ctl stop -m fast
Date
Msg-id f57082d9-3b94-ec91-9757-0659ea13c19e@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade vs. pg_ctl stop -m fast  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 1/13/17 9:45 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 1/12/17 9:43 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:17:52AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>>>> In 9.5, the default pg_ctl stop mode was changed from "smart" to "fast".
>>>> In pg_upgrade, there is this code:
>>>>     ...
>>>> I think the last line should be changed to something like
>>>>               fast ? "-m fast" : "-m smart");
>>>
>>> Ugh.  Clear oversight.
>>>
>>> There is maybe room for a separate discussion about whether pg_upgrade
>>> *should* be using fast mode, but if so we could remove the "bool fast"
>>> argument from this function altogether.
>>
>> Agreed, it should be remove.  Should I do it?
> 
> For 9.5 and 9.6, I think we should backpatch what I suggested above, to
> minimize the behavior change.

I have committed that (including to master).

> For master we can consider removing the
> distinction and just use fast shutdown all the time, but I haven't
> checked all the possible implications of that change.

I'm not planning to work on this at this time.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Serge Rielau
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Packages: Again
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take