Re: pg_upgrade

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Brian Hirt <bhirt(at)me(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade
Date: 2010-09-28 21:49:10
Message-ID: 201009282149.o8SLnA317235@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Brian Hirt wrote:
> > It looks like it's related to atol
>
> Yep, I found the use of atol in the pg_upgrade code too. Working on a
> patch now.

I have applied the attached patch to HEAD and 9.0.X. Odd I had never
received a bug report about this before. Good thing it didn't silently
fail, but it is designed to be very picky.

This patch will appear in the next 9.0.X release. Thanks for the
report.

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

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

Attachment Content-Type Size
/rtmp/diff text/x-diff 9.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-09-28 21:51:57 Re: Behavior of parameter holders in query containing a '$1'
Previous Message Ivan Sergio Borgonovo 2010-09-28 21:48:16 Re: huge difference in performance between MS SQL and pg 8.3 on UPDATE with full text search