Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 13:31:23 -0600
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani@google.com>,
	Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade: transfer pg_largeobject_metadata's files when
 possible
Message-ID: <aYTwC8V50rPgw6GE@nathan>
References: <aLsoIeIxlCi-L7C_@nathan>
 <aLuKa8FWd_uMPzSg@paquier.xyz>
 <aL8sgVdZcuqZnvXn@nathan>
 <3yd2ss6n7xywo6pmhd7jjh3bqwgvx35bflzgv3ag4cnzfkik7m@hiyadppqxx6w>
 <sc2uulu7gaajlnis7vqx25hmn6yd74drnlbzvupskx7jwyzejb@3vwodvuurtqb>
 <aYNuhbXkM5h8Zcsu@nathan>
 <aYOnT5EqAqI3ooBO@nathan>
 <qfp7z4c3m6bw53oky33halcdhomiijod6segzrhf757ijjvapr@e5rf4u5wnfmu>
 <aYTVAFTPelebVl6W@nathan>
 <nt56moqkh6yoerzw5cml6qu7m4mxu65vqtgdt3nbm5mhpg5hqt@4s5oa3sqhzub>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <nt56moqkh6yoerzw5cml6qu7m4mxu65vqtgdt3nbm5mhpg5hqt@4s5oa3sqhzub>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aYTwC8V50rPgw6GE%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 01:02:17PM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> Upthread I also wondering why we do all the work in getLOs() if we don't
> actually need most of it (only if there are comments or labels).  Right now
> that's a very slow and very memory intensive part of doing an upgrade of a
> system with a lot of binary upgrades.  Do we need *any* of that if we go the
> path you suggest?

AFAICT we only need it for the comments and security labels later on.
Commit a45c78e3 did batch 1000 large objects into each ArchiveEntry, but of
course there can still be a ton of entries.  In theory, we could update the
pg_largeobject_metadata query to only retrieve LOs with comments and
security labels.  I'm not sure it's worth trying to optimize further than
that; we've long operated under the assumption that comments/seclabels on
LOs are pretty rare.

-- 
nathan