| From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sam Saffron <sam(dot)saffron(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Failure upgrading PG 9.2 to 9.3 |
| Date: | 2014-03-26 14:05:10 |
| Message-ID: | 5332DE96.1010200@aklaver.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 03/25/2014 05:23 PM, Sam Saffron wrote:
> Sorry, its part of a rather elaborate docker based upgrade, that
> install is just done to get the binaries, the data is all in a
> completely different location which is untouched.
So there are two instances of 9.2 in play at one time?
The upgrade process is not inadvertently cross referencing the two?
I realize Toms suggestion got you past the error, just trying to figure
what corrupted the system catalogs in the first place. I am assuming the
9.2 instance that became corrupted was running properly until the upgrade?
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Adrian Klaver
> <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 03/25/2014 05:14 PM, Sam Saffron wrote:
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brian Crowell | 2014-03-26 15:01:33 | Re: PG choosing nested loop for set membership? |
| Previous Message | Joek Hondius | 2014-03-26 11:13:12 | Solved: could not receive data from server, background writer proces exited with exit code 0 |