public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Banck <[email protected]>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
Cc: vignesh C <[email protected]>
Cc: Kumar, Sachin <[email protected]>
Cc: Robins Tharakan <[email protected]>
Cc: Jan Wieck <[email protected]>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:39:19 +0300
Message-ID: <CAPpHfduszAcQk9YAQd8PyUhtzY=SFXhBHjrhRzBn0vLaVJny2g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<20240327150826.GB3994937@nathanxps13>
<20240401191930.GA2302032@nathanxps13>
<[email protected]>
<ZqEND4ZcTDBmcv31@pryzbyj2023>
<CAPpHfduUSA7c0YrTxN443SwXXCL41vmXkavYJjN8GS3Wc5Z42w@mail.gmail.com>
<ZqQIxIsaPWO6coil@pryzbyj2023>
<[email protected]>
<CAPpHfdtpr2FYVYqmARZdSp=2zsndgJgmSsHFxFFNTiYRfX8uaA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAPpHfdu63MK5k4qBNc4YV14MFdNq8rCsvz0x7+Z=ijbFm1y6wQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 12:24 AM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
> So I'm forced to the conclusion that we'd better make the transaction
> size adaptive as per Alexander's suggestion.
>
> In addition to the patches attached, I experimented with making
> dumpTableSchema fold all the ALTER TABLE commands for a single table
> into one command. That's do-able without too much effort, but I'm now
> convinced that we shouldn't. It would break the semicolon-counting
> hack for detecting that tables like these involve extra work.
> I'm also not very confident that the backend won't have trouble with
> ALTER TABLE commands containing hundreds of subcommands. That's
> something we ought to work on probably, but it's not a project that
> I want to condition v17 pg_upgrade's stability on.
>
> Anyway, proposed patches attached. 0001 is some trivial cleanup
> that I noticed while working on the failed single-ALTER-TABLE idea.
> 0002 merges the catalog-UPDATE commands that dumpTableSchema issues,
> and 0003 is Alexander's suggestion.
Nice to see you picked up my idea. I took a look over the patchset.
Looks good to me.
------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase
view thread (15+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects
In-Reply-To: <CAPpHfduszAcQk9YAQd8PyUhtzY=SFXhBHjrhRzBn0vLaVJny2g@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox