| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | depesz(at)depesz(dot)com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |
| Date: | 2011-08-31 16:32:04 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZMpY4CmxOCvWP+1=PKUMop8Pnxj3+E-Czy01xLOV=GUA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:18:55AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> >
>> > OK, this was very helpful. I found out that there is a bug in current
>> > 9.0.X, 9.1.X, and HEAD that I introduced recently when I excluded temp
>> > tables. (The bug is not in any released version of pg_upgrade.) The
>> > attached, applied patches should fix it for you. I assume you are
>> > running 9.0.X, and not 9.0.4.
>>
>> pg_upgrade worked. Now I'm doing reindex and later on vacuumdb -az.
>>
>> will keep you posted.
>
> FYI, this pg_upgrade bug exists in PG 9.1RC1, but not in earlier betas.
> Users can either wait for 9.1 RC2 or Final, or use the patch I posted.
> The bug is not in 9.0.4 and will not be in 9.0.5.
Based on subsequent discussion on this thread, it sounds like
something is still broken.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Don | 2011-08-31 16:52:19 | Re: out of memory - no sort |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-08-31 16:29:17 | Re: out of memory - no sort |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2011-08-31 17:03:22 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2011-08-31 16:23:07 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |