Re: pg_upgrade & tablespaces

On 12/20/2013 07:32 AM, Joseph Kregloh wrote:

>
> Case B:
>
> pg_upgrade -b /home/jkregloh/pg_bin/ -B /usr/local/bin/ -D
> /usr/local/pgsql_93/data -d /usr/local/pgsql/data/ -P 5452 -p 5451
>
> In this case, the OLD cluster is in the default location and the
> new one
> in /usr/local/pgsql_93/. This will complete successfully. HOWEVER in
> /usr/local/pgsql/data I will be left with the PG_9.0 and PG_9.3
> folders,
> then the 9.3 cluster does not have access to any of this because
> it's
> install location is /usr/local/pgsql_93/data. I would either have to
> copy all of the data over to the new /usr/local/pgsql_93/data or the
> inverse. Which in any case would be pretty messy and error prone.
>
> I am open to suggestions if anyone has any ideas of what to try.
>
>
> At this point I am confused, so I will try to summarize the issue to
> date and you can indicate whether I am correct or not
>
> 1) You are doing a test upgrade from 9.0 to 9.3 using pg_upgrade
>
> 2) You are using two BSD jails, one of which holds the 9.0 instance
> and the other the 9.3 instance.
>
> 3) The upgrade is being run from the 9.3 jail against 9.0 /bin and
> /data directories that are mounted in the 9.3 jail
>
> 4) Your original attempts failed because pg_upgrade is confused
> about which directory to copy from/to
>
> 5) Your latest attempt sort of succeeded, but left you with both 9.0
> and 9.3 data directories in /usr/local/pgsql/data which is supposed
> to be the 9.0 /data.
>
> Correct on all points above.
>
> Now my questions:
>
> 1) Still on the case of the port numbers. In your first example port
> 5451 is associated with the 9.3 instance, in the second with the 9.0
> instance and the reverse for port 5453. Is that really the case?
>
>
> It should be 5452 for the old port. That was a copy/paste from one of my
> first attempts. But the ports I am using are 5451 for 9.3 and 5452 for
> 9.0. Sorry about that confusion.

Great, one less moving part:)

>
> 2) Have you tried what has been suggested which is locating both
> instances inside one jail directly, without the mount redirection?
>
>
> Yes I have tried that with the same results.

Hmmm.

So was your latest attempt where you ended up with a doubled data/ in
the two or one jail scenario?

Can we see a directory listing for that case?

You say in the single jail case you got the same results. Which would
that be the failure, the double data/ or both ?

>
>
>
> Thanks,
> -Joseph
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com <mailto:adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>
> <mailto:adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)__com <mailto:adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com <mailto:adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>
>
>

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com