From: | Tory M Blue <tmblue(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | pg_upgrade |
Date: | 2011-12-03 04:09:25 |
Message-ID: | CAEaSS0aT0rPBhgjmQSuKny_vnqysoJyB79LxThbQ7Ruu+EYpig@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
So we are making progress on our performance issues, we are splitting
the data, changing the index value etc. So far having some success,
but we also want to test out some of the options and changes in the 9
branch, but trying to dump and restore 750gb of data is not all that
fun, so I'm trying to avoid that.
So upgraded from 8.4.4 64 bit to 9.1.1 64bit.
If we upgrade a database that just uses the public table space there
are no issues, works fine. However when we try to upgrade a db that
has tablespaces defined it errors out trying to load the data from the
then now new db.
The tablespaces are hardcoded with a path, so that seems to cause issues.
Steps I'm taking
Standard location of data /data/db
Standard binary location /pgsql/bin
I'm moving the standard location to /data1/db and moving the binaries
to /pgsql8/bin
WHY: because my build scripts put my binaries and data in these
locations, so without recreating my build process, I have to move the
current data and binary locations before I install 9.11
So I move olddata to /data1/db
oldbinary to /pgsql8/bin
new 9.1.1 db goes to /data/db
newbinary installs at /pgsql/
So when I run pg_upgrade (check validates the config), however trying
to the upgrade nets;
Restoring user relation files
/data/queue/16384/16406
error while copying queue.adm_version (/data/queue/16384/16406 to
/data/queue/PG_9.1_201105231/16407/16406): No such file or directory
Failure, exiting
As you can see, it's sticking with it's original path and not
realizing that I'm trying now to install into /data from /data1
What is the flaw here? Do I have to rebuild my build process to
install in a different location?, not sure what my choices are here. I
mean I'm telling the upgrade process where new and old are located, I
believe it should be overriding something and not allowing the
included error.
Slaps and or pointers are welcome
Tory
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ernesto Quiñones | 2011-12-03 13:11:49 | Re: Question about VACUUM |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2011-12-03 03:42:12 | Re: Question about VACUUM |