| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bernhard Schrader <bernhard(dot)schrader(at)innogames(dot)de>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |
| Date: | 2012-12-18 20:20:07 |
| Message-ID: | 50D0CFF7.5030606@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
On 12/18/2012 02:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> He's upgrading from 9.0, which didn't have enum extension at all, and
>> where odd enums didn't mean anything special.
> Really? The noncontiguous pg_enum OIDs shown in
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-12/msg01089.php
> suggest strongly that *something's* been done to that type since
> it was created.
That's what he said.
People have been known to hack pg_enum on their own, especially before
we added enum extension.
Of course, if they do that they get to keep both pieces.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-18 20:38:13 | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-18 19:58:44 | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-12-18 20:20:56 | Re: logical decoding - GetOldestXmin |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-18 19:58:44 | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |