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

Re: pg_upgrade from 9.1.3 to 9.2 failed

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Rural Hunter <ruralhunter(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade from 9.1.3 to 9.2 failed
Date: 2012-09-15 18:06:03
Message-ID: 20120915180603.GA20907@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-adminpgsql-hackers
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:40:06AM +0800, Rural Hunter wrote:
> >>>The check is to make sure that once we have created all the user schema
> >>>details in the new cluster, that there are the same number of objects in
> >>>the new and old databases.
> >>>
> >>>Obviously there are a different number in your case here, but I don't
> >>>know why those would be different, and in fact, because we have never
> >>>hit this, there isn't even any debug output that shows the source of the
> >>>difference.
> >>>
> >>>If I send you a patch can you compile it and send back the debug output
> >>>it produces?
> >>>
> >>Yes sure, I will try to compile and retest with it.
> >Actually, I have a simpler idea.  At the point where it fails, you can
> >run pg_dump --schema-only on the testdb database in the old and new
> >cluster and then diff those output files and email the result to us;  it
> >should show the mismatch.  I am not sure if the dumps will output the
> >objects in the same order, it might.
> >
> diff attached.

OK, I see many new ALTER TABLE commands, but nothing that would cause a
difference in relation count.  

Attached is a patch that will return the OID of the old/new mismatched
entries.  Please research the pg_class objects on the old/new clusters
that have the mismatch and let me know.  It might be something that
isn't in the old cluster, or not in the new cluster.

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

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

Attachment: pg_upgrade.diff
Description: text/x-diff (584 bytes)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2012-09-15 18:44:19
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-09-15 17:21:44
Subject: Re: embedded list v2

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Rural HunterDate: 2012-09-16 04:38:37
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade from 9.1.3 to 9.2 failed
Previous:From: F. BROUARD / SQLproDate: 2012-09-15 10:16:09
Subject: PostGIS install fail on 64 bits Windows Seven system

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