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: 2011-08-31 17:03:22
Message-ID: 20110831170322.GA12377@depesz.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:16:03PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> FYI, this pg_upgrade bug exists in PG 9.1RC1, but not in earlier betas. 
> Users can either wait for 9.1 RC2 or Final, or use the patch I posted. 
> The bug is not in 9.0.4 and will not be in 9.0.5.

I assume you mean the bug that caused pg_upgrade to fail.

But there still is (existing in 9.0.4 too) bug which causes vacuum to
fail.

Best regards,

depesz


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2011-08-31 17:23:05
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-08-31 16:32:04
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Scott RibeDate: 2011-08-31 17:09:54
Subject: Re: out of memory - no sort
Previous:From: DonDate: 2011-08-31 16:52:19
Subject: Re: out of memory - no sort

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