From: | Kai Hessing <kai(dot)hessing(at)hobsons(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Problem with restoring database from 7.3.1 to 8.0.1 |
Date: | 2006-01-18 09:51:12 |
Message-ID: | 436hcjF1mc0c7U1@individual.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-general |
Hi Tom,
thanks for your answer. I did some testing now but still have the same
problem.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Kai Hessing <kai(dot)hessing(at)hobsons(dot)de> writes:
>> [DB-Problem]
>
> Hmm. This looks like a pg_dump bug, ie, issuing ALTER OWNER commands
> for the wrong index name (or, perhaps, issuing them before having
> created the index ... do you use any indexes named like that?).
>
> Which pg_dump version did you use to make the dump? The usual
> recommendation is to use the newer version's pg_dump in this sort
> of situation.
The whole thing is a little bit strange because the indexes doesn't
really seem to exist. For example the error:
pg_restore: [Archivierer (DB)] Fehler in Inhaltsverzeichniseintrag 114;
0 5901799 CONSTRAINT usertypeid mh1004
pg_restore: [Archivierer (DB)] could not execute query: FEHLER:
Relation »public.usertypeid« existiert nicht
Command was: ALTER INDEX public.usertypeid OWNER TO mh1004;
There is no index called 'public.usertypeid'. The index name is
'public.auth_usertype_pkey ' and references the row 'usertypeid' in
table 'auth_usertype'. So it might be a pg_dump bug. And I do not
understand the sense of this ALTER command because the whole db and
everything in it belongs already to user mh1004.
But the dump worked perfectly fine at our old testmachine with 7.4.x, so
I'm not sure if it's really pg_dump producing the error. The pg_dump
Version is the same like the database: 7.3.2.
I am not able to update postgres on this server (see below). So how may
I upgrade just the pg_dump?
> BTW, you should *not* be updating to 8.0.1. 8.0.6 is the latest release
> in that series. It is almost never a good idea to be running anything
> but the latest minor release in a series. (The fact that you're still
> on 7.3.1 doesn't speak well for your attentiveness to updates either.
> We don't make minor releases just to keep busy, you know.)
You're perfectly right. Just to explain:
Test server: It was a fresh Suse 9.3 install and after my assistant told
me that postgres is running, I tried the import. Now it's patched to
8.0.3. It is still not the newest one, but Suse doesn't seem to provide
a newer precompiled version for their distribution yet.
Production system: It is a 7.3.2 (my mistake) and it is hosted
externally. Maybe it's something about debian and stable and so on. But
it doesn't matter anymore, because I think we're switching to a new
provider soon and actual patches are part of the contract.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kai Hessing | 2006-01-18 10:51:43 | Re: Problem with restoring database from 7.3.1 to 8.0.1 |
Previous Message | Stefan Holzheu | 2006-01-18 08:00:08 | Re: like vs = |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Friedrich | 2006-01-18 10:05:24 | Re: Partitioning: Planner makes no use of indexes on inherited |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2006-01-18 09:50:28 | Re: Partitioning: Planner makes no use of indexes on inherited |