| From: | hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade problem |
| Date: | 2011-08-26 15:28:35 |
| Message-ID: | 20110826152834.GA7886@depesz.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:18:55AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> OK, this was very helpful. I found out that there is a bug in current
> 9.0.X, 9.1.X, and HEAD that I introduced recently when I excluded temp
> tables. (The bug is not in any released version of pg_upgrade.) The
> attached, applied patches should fix it for you. I assume you are
> running 9.0.X, and not 9.0.4.
pg_upgrade worked. Now I'm doing reindex and later on vacuumdb -az.
will keep you posted.
Best regards,
depesz
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | pasman pasmański | 2011-08-26 15:43:24 | Re: documentation for hashtext? |
| Previous Message | pasman pasmański | 2011-08-26 15:14:59 | Re: COPY FROM how long should take ? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-08-26 16:46:11 | Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-08-26 15:22:25 | Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only |