Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 09:49:58 -0500
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Jorge Torralba <jorge.torralba@gmail.com>
Cc: "pgsql-admin@postgresql.org" <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade with --link then pg_basebackup for
 replication
Message-ID: <20151104144958.GA15722@momjian.us>
References: 
 <CACut7uQfoaZgpznYybYVqM-w02vKOUf8HLGn5+EAqmRnO3U4jg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACut7uQfoaZgpznYybYVqM-w02vKOUf8HLGn5+EAqmRnO3U4jg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org

On Mon, Nov  2, 2015 at 04:39:02PM -0800, Jorge Torralba wrote:
> Here is an odd question.
> 
> If one was to upgrade Postgres to 9.4 from 9.1 using the --link option, then
> setup replication using pg_basebackup, would the standby server preserve the
> hard links with the pg_basebackup or will -D /new/destination/data/dir be a
> clean unlinked version?

I will be clean.  If you want to upgrade the the standby to 9.4 without
a new basebackup, see this blog entry:

	http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2015.html#June_10_2015

> Afterwards, if failing over to standby then failing back, would that implement
> a non linked version back on the primary if specifying a new data directory as
> well ?

The links are only created on the server you run pg_upgrade, meaning
normally not on the standby.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Roman grave inscription                             +


-- 
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin