From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE lock downgrades have broken pg_upgrade |
Date: | 2016-05-11 01:01:12 |
Message-ID: | 20160511010112.GH22756@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 03:32:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I think possibly the easiest fix for this is to have pg_upgrade,
> > instead of RESETting a nonexistent option, RESET something that's
> > still considered to require AccessExclusiveLock. "user_catalog_table"
> > would work, looks like; though I'd want to annotate its entry in
> > reloptions.c to warn people away from downgrading its lock level.
>
> I tried fixing it like that. The alternate RESET target had behaved as
> expected when I'd tested by hand, but in pg_upgrade it still fails,
> only now with
>
> Creating newly-required TOAST tables SQL command failed
> ALTER TABLE "public"."i_need_a_toast_table" RESET (user_catalog_table);
> ERROR: pg_type OID value not set when in binary upgrade mode
I think this means that the ALTER TABLE RESET is adding or potentially
adding a pg_type row, and no one called
binary_upgrade_set_next_pg_type_oid().
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-11 01:06:45 | Re: HeapTupleSatisfiesToast() busted? (was atomic pin/unpin causing errors) |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-05-11 00:58:33 | Re: HeapTupleSatisfiesToast() busted? (was atomic pin/unpin causing errors) |