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

Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem

From: hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem
Date: 2011-08-26 15:28:35
Message-ID: 20110826152834.GA7886@depesz.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:18:55AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> OK, this was very helpful.  I found out that there is a bug in current
> 9.0.X, 9.1.X, and HEAD that I introduced recently when I excluded temp
> tables.  (The bug is not in any released version of pg_upgrade.)  The
> attached, applied patches should fix it for you.  I assume you are
> running 9.0.X, and not 9.0.4.

pg_upgrade worked. Now I'm doing reindex and later on vacuumdb -az.

will keep you posted.

Best regards,

depesz


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-08-26 16:46:11
Subject: Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2011-08-26 15:22:25
Subject: Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: pasman pasmańskiDate: 2011-08-26 15:43:24
Subject: Re: documentation for hashtext?
Previous:From: pasman pasmańskiDate: 2011-08-26 15:14:59
Subject: Re: COPY FROM how long should take ?

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