Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

From: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
To: James Sewell <james(dot)sewell(at)jirotech(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11
Date: 2019-09-03 19:47:35
Message-ID: e06c290c-d6a3-73f6-4740-cc0260c79433@aklaver.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 9/2/19 5:52 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:

>> It's still creating the schema elements when it fails, it hasn't
>> started linking yet
>
> Alright at least you still a working 9.6 cluster .
>
> Not sure where to go from here. Like you I am not sure how it can CREATE
> EXTENSION and not actually follow through on that. Especially with no
> errors for that operation. I'm going to have to think on this. Hopefully
> someone else has an idea on this and can chime in.

Aah. I don't have postgis installed, still:

pg_dump --binary-upgrade -s -d production -U postgres >
production_binary.sql

-- For binary upgrade, create an empty extension and insert objects into it
DROP EXTENSION IF EXISTS tablefunc;
SELECT pg_catalog.binary_upgrade_create_empty_extension('tablefunc',
'public', true, '1.0', NULL, NULL, ARRAY[]::pg_catalog.text[]);

Try the above on your schema and see what you get.

>
>>
>>      >
>>      > I have set PGBINOLD, PGBINNEW, PGDATAOLD, PGDATANEW correctly.
>>

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kumar, Virendra 2019-09-03 20:56:28 Running a Simple Update Statement Fails, Second Time Suceeds.
Previous Message Michael Lewis 2019-09-03 19:00:39 Re: literal vs dynamic partition constraint in plan execution