Re: fix for pg_upgrade

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: panam <panam(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: fix for pg_upgrade
Date: 2011-09-25 21:12:34
Message-ID: 201109252112.p8PLCYA25889@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

panam wrote:
> OK, i started once again:
>
>
> I hope the following is the correct way of querying the table corresponding
> to a relid:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/fix-for-pg-upgrade-tp3411128p4838427.html

Yes, that is very close to what I needed. Ideally you would have
included the oid from pg_class:

select oid, * from pg_class where oid = 465783 or oid = 16505

Can you supply that?

Also can you email me privately the following output from the old
database? It should only be the schema and not your data:

pg_dumpall --schema-only --binary-upgrade

I am looking for something like this in the file:

-- For binary upgrade, must preserve pg_class oids
SELECT binary_upgrade.set_next_heap_pg_class_oid('16385'::pg_catalog.oid);

CREATE TABLE test (
x integer
);

but for your case it would be the 'accounts' file. You can email just
those lines if you want, and that you can probably email to hackers.
Thanks.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-09-25 22:30:18 Re: Optimizing pg_trgm makesign() (was Re: WIP: Fast GiST index build)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-09-25 20:17:30 Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf