From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2022 21:09:22 -0400
Message-ID: <YuCQQtF2p3qWs7t+@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoYXMGtEXgX06acfLG2X3qXFf2n4btvN7pF0QLXSQF2T9Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+TgmobwWGO98mWB1X2xpo25gatKsjpENtnYaUFcvVs7raRQPg@mail.gmail.com>
<20220702154917.GM13040@telsasoft.com>
<CA+Tgmobg=5hAVCcTD2277AiuqCL0Vp38ETepuR2hAxeqSyR9kg@mail.gmail.com>
<Ysc++/F+TrZ931il@momjian.us>
<CA+TgmoZtAeh0Si0HxD0NxCqb2u99aURvCXVPyqyqD2O-0tScBQ@mail.gmail.com>
<Yst9Wc/sWyMz4eff@paquier.xyz>
<CA+Tgmobpm++X2g+SK6wqfHyTmyNcapoQtZbHJFMs-aq3ije=Aw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoZsBHG_YWHwi3ymwS9Fiuxxc82YkrUc5PvkrtMAeqXEWg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoYYMXGUJO5GZk1-MByJGu_bB8CbOL6GJQC8=Bzt6x6vDg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoYXMGtEXgX06acfLG2X3qXFf2n4btvN7pF0QLXSQF2T9Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 03:45:11PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 2:57 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well, it took a while to figure out how to make that work, but I
> > believe I've got it now. Attached please find a couple of patches that
> > should get the job done. They might need a bit of polish, but I think
> > the basic concepts are sound.
>
> So, would people like these patches (1) committed to master only, (2)
> committed to master and back-patched into v15, or (3) not committed at
> all? Michael argued upthread that it was too risky to be tinkering
> with things at this stage in the release cycle and, certainly, the
> more time goes by, the more true that gets. But I'm not convinced that
> these patches involve an inordinate degree of risk, and using beta as
> a time to fix things that turned out to be buggy is part of the point
> of the whole thing. On the other hand, the underlying issue isn't that
> serious either, and nobody seems to have reviewed the patches in
> detail, either. I don't mind committing them on my own recognizance if
> that's what people would prefer; I can take responsibility for fixing
> anything that is further broken, as I suppose would be expected even
> if someone else did review. But, I don't want to do something that
> other people feel is the wrong thing to have done.
This behavior is new in PG 15, and I would be worried to have one new
behavior in PG 15 and another one in PG 16. Therefore, I would like to
see it in PG 15 and master. I also think not doing anything and leaving
these zero-length files around would also be risky.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: bruce@momjian.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, pryzby@telsasoft.com, gowdashru@gmail.com
Subject: Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
In-Reply-To: <YuCQQtF2p3qWs7t+@momjian.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox