Hi,

On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 22:06 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > I just performed a test upgrade from 9.1 to 9.2, and used
> > --new-port variable. However, the analyze_new_cluster.sh does not
> > include the new port, thus when I run it, it fails. Any chance to 
> > add the port number to the script?
> 
> Well, the reason people normally use the port number is to do a live
> check, but obviously when the script is created it isn't doing a
> check.  I am worried that if I do embed the port number in there, then
> if they change the port after the upgrade, they now can't use the
> script.  I assume users would have PGPORT set before running the
> script, no? 

They can't use the script in each way -- at least we can make it usable
for one case, I think.

Regards,

-- 
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Community: devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
http://www.gunduz.org  Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz

In response to

• Re: pg_upgrade does not completely honor --new-port at 2012-09-27 02:06:50 from Bruce Momjian

Responses

• Re: pg_upgrade does not completely honor --new-port at 2012-10-03 20:16:55 from Alvaro Herrera
• Re: pg_upgrade does not completely honor --new-port at 2012-10-03 20:20:27 from Bruce Momjian

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Michael Paquier	Date: 2012-10-03 20:12:58
	Subject: Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Previous:	From: Daniel Farina	Date: 2012-10-03 19:42:37
	Subject: Re: Hash id in pg_stat_statements