From: | hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |
Date: | 2011-08-31 17:03:22 |
Message-ID: | 20110831170322.GA12377@depesz.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:16:03PM -0400, Bruce Momjian 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.
I assume you mean the bug that caused pg_upgrade to fail.
But there still is (existing in 9.0.4 too) bug which causes vacuum to
fail.
Best regards,
depesz
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Ribe | 2011-08-31 17:09:54 | Re: out of memory - no sort |
Previous Message | Don | 2011-08-31 16:52:19 | Re: out of memory - no sort |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2011-08-31 17:23:05 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-08-31 16:32:04 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |