Re: pg_upgrade 9.4 -> 9.5 with pg_trgm fails for me

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 9.4 -> 9.5 with pg_trgm fails for me
Date: 2016-01-08 21:03:51
Message-ID: 24012.1452287031@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 12:38:47PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> After digging through this, I figured out the problem: you'd installed
>> pg_trgm into the pg_catalog schema, whereas when I was testing I'd just
>> dropped it into the public schema. That confuses pg_dump into not
>> emitting the shell type that it should emit. It's an easy fix now
>> that I see the problem.
>> This bug does *not*, AFAICT, explain any problem you might have with
>> "dump" transfers, only with pg_upgrade.

> I realize that. Thank you for looking into this issue.

BTW, the one-liner fix that I'd had in mind when I wrote that does indeed
fix this particular problem, but after studying the code I realized that
there's a whole bunch of related problems; for instance I believe
pg_upgrade would lose domain constraints on a domain type that's in an
extension installed into pg_catalog :-(. See
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/19767.1452279786@sss.pgh.pa.us

So a fix might take a bit more time than I thought, but hopefully we'll
have something in time for next month's update releases.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karsten Hilbert 2016-01-08 21:06:10 Re: pg_upgrade 9.4 -> 9.5 with pg_trgm fails for me
Previous Message Karsten Hilbert 2016-01-08 20:55:05 Re: pg_upgrade 9.4 -> 9.5 with pg_trgm fails for me