Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tilmann Singer wrote:
> >> However, all of the sequences were at the initial values and not
> >> bumped up to the last used value as I would have expected. The first
> >> nextval call on any sequence in the migrated 8.4 database always
> >> returned 1.
> 
> > Wow, that is also surprising.  I am going to have to run some tests to
> > find the cause, but it certainly is not intended.
> 
> Looks like pg_migrator neglects to include relkind 'S' in the set of
> tables that it needs to physically migrate.

Thanks, I have fixed pg_migrator with the attached patch.  Once we find
the cause of the lovacuum problem, I will make a new pg_migrator release.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

• Re: [GENERAL] pg_migrator not setting values of sequences? at 2009-07-13 23:18:09 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: [GENERAL] pg_migrator not setting values of sequences? at 2009-07-15 16:04:29 from Zdenek Kotala

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2009-07-14 02:42:53
	Subject: Re: Upgrading our minimum required flex version for 8.5
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2009-07-14 00:36:22
	Subject: Re: [GENERAL] large object does not exist after pg_migrator

pgsql-general by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2009-07-14 03:03:04
	Subject: Re: [GENERAL] large object does not exist after pg_migrator
Previous:	From: Andreas	Date: 2009-07-14 00:54:44
	Subject: Flexibility of views and functions?