Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects

Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info> writes:
> On 3/23/21 2:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If you're passing multiple options, that is
>> --pg-dump-options "--foo=x --bar=y"
>> it seems just horribly fragile.  Lose the double quotes and suddenly
>> --bar is a separate option to pg_upgrade itself, not part of the argument
>> for the previous option.  That's pretty easy to do when passing things
>> through shell scripts, too.

> ... which would be all really easy if pg_upgrade wouldn't be assembling 
> a shell script string to pass into parallel_exec_prog() by itself.

No, what I was worried about is shell script(s) that invoke pg_upgrade
and have to pass down some of these options through multiple levels of
option parsing.

BTW, it doesn't seem like the "pg-" prefix has any value-add here,
so maybe "--dump-option" and "--restore-option" would be suitable
spellings.

            regards, tom lane