Re: Fix pg_upgrade to preserve datdba

From: Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fix pg_upgrade to preserve datdba
Date: 2021-03-21 17:50:45
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/21/21 1:15 PM, Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 3/21/21 12:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info> writes:
>>> On 3/20/21 12:39 AM, Jan Wieck wrote:
>>>> On the way pg_upgrade also mangles the pg_database.datdba
>>>> (all databases are owned by postgres after an upgrade; will submit a
>>>> separate patch for that as I consider that a bug by itself).
>>> Patch attached.
>> Hmm, doesn't this lose all *other* database-level properties?
>> I think maybe what we have here is a bug in pg_restore, its
>> --create switch ought to be trying to update the database's
>> ownership.
> Possibly. I didn't look into that route.

Thanks for that. I like this patch a lot better.

Regards, Jan

Jan Wieck
Principle Database Engineer
Amazon Web Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
pg_restore-preserve-datdba.v1.diff text/x-patch 530 bytes

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2021-03-21 17:54:53 Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-03-21 17:20:21 Re: New IndexAM API controlling index vacuum strategies