Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_upgrade does not completely honor --new-port

From: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers ML <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade does not completely honor --new-port
Date: 2012-10-03 20:00:16
Message-ID: 1349294416.22537.17.camel@lenovo01-laptop03.gunduz.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

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

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group