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

Re: pg_upgrade

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Brian Hirt <bhirt(at)me(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade
Date: 2010-09-28 21:49:10
Message-ID: 201009282149.o8SLnA317235@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Brian Hirt wrote:
> > It looks like it's related to atol
> 
> Yep, I found the use of atol in the pg_upgrade code too.  Working on a
> patch now.

I have applied the attached patch to HEAD and 9.0.X.  Odd I had never
received a bug report about this before.  Good thing it didn't silently
fail, but it is designed to be very picky.

This patch will appear in the next 9.0.X release.  Thanks for the
report.

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

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

Attachment: /rtmp/diff
Description: text/x-diff (9.2 KB)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-09-28 21:51:57
Subject: Re: Behavior of parameter holders in query containing a '$1'
Previous:From: Ivan Sergio BorgonovoDate: 2010-09-28 21:48:16
Subject: Re: huge difference in performance between MS SQL and pg 8.3 on UPDATE with full text search

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