the non-development install. Instead, use the LOAD mechanism to check
for the pg_upgrade_support shared object, like we do for other shared
object checks.
Backpatch to 9.1.
Report from Àlvaro
have pg_upgrade allocate a maximum fixed size buffer for testing the
library file name, rather than base the allocation on the library name.
Backpatch to 9.1.
This follows my proposal of yesterday, namely that we try to recreate the
previous state of the extension exactly, instead of allowing CREATE
EXTENSION to run a SQL script that might create some entirely-incompatible
on-disk state. In --binary-upgrade mode, pg_dump won't issue CREATE
EXTENSION at all, but instead uses a kluge function provided by
pg_upgrade_support to recreate the pg_extension row (and extension-level
pg_depend entries) without creating any member objects. The member objects
are then restored in the same way as if they weren't members, in particular
using pg_upgrade's normal hacks to preserve OIDs that need to be preserved.
Then, for each member object, ALTER EXTENSION ADD is issued to recreate the
pg_depend entry that marks it as an extension member.
In passing, fix breakage in pg_upgrade's enum-type support: somebody didn't
fix it when the noise word VALUE got added to ALTER TYPE ADD. Also,
rationalize parsetree representation of COMMENT ON DOMAIN and fix
get_object_address() to allow OBJECT_DOMAIN.
up relations, but rather order old/new relations and use the same array
index value for both. This should speed up pg_upgrade for databases
with many relations.
which is stored in pg_largeobject_metadata.
No backpatch to 9.0 because you can't migrate from 9.0 to 9.0 with the
same catversion (because of tablespace conflict), and a pre-9.0
migration to 9.0 has not large object permissions to migrate.
Toast tables have identical pg_class.oid and pg_class.relfilenode, but
for clarity it is good to preserve the pg_class.oid.
Update comments regarding what is preserved, and do some
variable/function renaming for clarity.
pointers, which simplifies the code. This was not possible in 9.0 because
everything was in a single nested struct, but is possible now.
Per suggestion from Tom.
After much expenditure of effort, we've got this to the point where the
performance penalty is pretty minimal in typical cases.
Andrew Dunstan, reviewed by Brendan Jurd, Dean Rasheed, and Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian