RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

Jerry,

OMG, I think you nailed this... I know what I did. I cut/pasted the command from an e-mail... I have seen this issue before with stuff not related to postgres. But then those commands failed in syntax error and then you know what you did wrong.

Similarly, I expect pg_upgrade to throw an error if it finds something it doesn't understand instead of ignoring and causing damage. Don't you agree?

Thanks for pointing that out. I will redo my upgrade.

-r -v -k -c --- good flags no utf8
-r -v -k –c --- bad flags....

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Sievers [mailto:gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 6:24 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna(at)fnal(dot)gov>
Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>; pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org; pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org; pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

Murthy Nunna <mnunna(at)fnal(dot)gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However, I am running into a different problem.

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever dash char.

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of fun ways so lordy knows just what you originally sent :-)

FWIW

>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna(at)fnal(dot)gov>;
> pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org; pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org;
> pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433
>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>>
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance that there is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end.
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres(dot)consulting(at)comcast(dot)net
p: 312.241.7800