Re: Official Windows Installer and Documentation

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David G. Johnston
Тема Re: Official Windows Installer and Documentation
Дата
Msg-id CAKFQuwa+cMTsKtYU6Z2YfTCXugecgVCnLqeHRa57CiqGxGNyEg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Official Windows Installer and Documentation  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Official Windows Installer and Documentation  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 8:22 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
I wrote:
> If EDB isn't adequately filling in the documentation for the behavior
> of their packaging, that's on them.

Having now looked more closely at the pg_upgrade documentation,
I don't think this is exactly EDB's fault; it's text that should
never have been there to begin with.  ISTM we need to simply rip out
lines 431..448 of pgupgrade.sgml, that is all the Windows-specific
text starting with

     For Windows users, you must be logged into an administrative account, and

That has got nothing to recommend it: we do not generally provide
platform-specific details in these man pages, and to the extent it
provides details, those details are likely to be wrong.

I mean, we do provide platform-specific details/examples, it's just that platform is a source installed Linux platform (though pathless)

Does the avoidance of dealing with other platforms also apply to NET STOP or do you find that an acceptable variance?  Or are you suggesting that basically all O/S commands should be zapped?  If not, then rewriting 442 to 446 to just be the command seems worthwhile.  I'd say pg_upgrade warrants an examples section like pg_basebackup has (though obviously pg_upgrade is procedural).

I do have another observation:

https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/4fc6b6eefcf98f79211bb790ee890ebcb05c178d/src/bin/pg_upgrade/check.c#L665

 if (PQntuples(res) != 1 ||
atooid(PQgetvalue(res, 0, 1)) != BOOTSTRAP_SUPERUSERID)
pg_fatal("database user \"%s\" is not the install user",
os_info.user);

Any reason to not inform the DBA the name of the install user here?  Sure, it is almost certainly postgres, but it also seems like an easy win in order for them, and anyone they may ask for help, to know exactly the name of install user in the clusters should that end up being the issue.  Additionally, from what I can tell, if that check does fail (or any of the checks really) it is not possible to tell whether the check was being performed against the old or new server.  The user does not know that checks against the old server are performed first then checks against the new one, and there are no banners saying "checking old/new"

David J.

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Ashutosh Bapat
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Improve description of XLOG_RUNNING_XACTS
Следующее
От: "kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com"
Дата:
Сообщение: RE: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply