Re: pg_group_name_index corrupt?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_group_name_index corrupt?
Date: 2000-05-05 15:41:30
Message-ID: 6754.957541290@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> If I remember correctly,pg_upgrade doesn't shutdown the postmaster
> after(or before) moving OLD data to the target dir though it tells us
> the message "You must stop/start the postmaster ...".
> How about calling pg_ctl from pg_upgrade to stop the postmaster ?

What I would actually like to see happen is that pg_upgrade uses a
standalone backend, with no postmaster running at all for the entire
procedure. Having a live postmaster connected to the system just
opens the door to getting screwed up by some other user connecting to
the database. But that's a bigger change than I dare try to make right
now...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-05-05 16:05:47 Re: Porting reports (cont'd)
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-05-05 15:36:01 Re: pg_group_name_index corrupt?