Re: Fixing pg_upgrade's check of available binaries

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fixing pg_upgrade's check of available binaries
Date: 2010-12-29 15:13:15
Message-ID: 201012291513.oBTFDF906796@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> I've been fooling around with creating upgrade-in-place support for the
> Fedora/RHEL RPMs. What I want to have is a separate postgresql-upgrade
> RPM containing just the minimum possible set of previous-release files,
> together with pg_upgrade itself. Experimenting with this convinced me
> that pg_upgrade is a few bricks shy of a load in its tests for whether
> the old and new clusters have the right binaries available:
>
> * it insists on pg_dumpall and psql being present in the old cluster,
> though they are not in fact called
> * it fails to check for pg_resetxlog, even though it needs it in both
> old and new clusters
> * it fails to check for pg_config, which it does need in the new
> cluster. It does not however really need it in the old cluster,
> because it has no use for the old cluster's --pkglibdir path.
>
> I propose the attached patch to clean these things up. Any objections?

Looks good to me. I was not super-strict about checking binaries
because I assumed a full install on both clusters, but it doesn't hurt
to make that more specific.

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

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Li Jie 2010-12-29 15:13:27 Re: small table left outer join big table
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-12-29 15:12:38 Re: Libpq PGRES_COPY_BOTH - version compatibility