Re: pg_group_name_index corrupt?

okay, I did the RC5 pg_dumpall and am doing a reload ... call me chicken
:)

On Fri, 5 May 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > okay, something that I think needs to be clarified ... RC5 requires an
> > initdb, so you have to do a pg_dumpall first, then initdb, then reload ...
>
> > your recent fixes ... should we be running pg_dumpall from RC5 on our RC4
> > databases, or does it not matter? I'm using the RC5 one right now, and
> > all appears correct, but I figured I'd ask ...
>
> pg_upgrade should work, or at least it's worth trying --- see the
> message I just posted. If you have anything in pg_group then the
> best procedure is to use the RC5 pg_dumpall, since RC4 and before's
> pg_dumpall neglects to dump pg_group. In any case, RC4 and before's
> pg_upgrade is now known to be broken, so be sure you use RC5's script
> at that point.
>
> Or just use dump/initdb/reload, but it'd be nice to get some pounding
> on pg_upgrade and find out if it's trustworthy now.
>
> I'd definitely recommend a full pg_dumpall before experimenting with
> pg_upgrade, just in case things go worng ;-)
>
> regards, tom lane
>

Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org