Re: Possible Bug in pg_upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Possible Bug in pg_upgrade
Date
Msg-id 1313046149.5229.1.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Possible Bug in pg_upgrade  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Possible Bug in pg_upgrade
List pgsql-hackers
On ons, 2011-08-10 at 18:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Byrne <dbyrne@mdb.com> writes:
> > Attached is a patch that skips orphaned temporary relations in pg_upgrade if they are lingering around. It works
for9.0 -> 9.1 upgrades, however I wasn't able to tell when pg_class.relistemp was added so if it was unavailable in
versionsprior to 9.0 an additional check will have to be added.
 
> 
> I'm inclined to think the correct fix is to revert the assumption that
> the old and new databases contain exactly the same number of tables ...
> that seems to have a lot of potential failure modes besides this one.

It's basically checking whether pg_dump -s worked.  That doesn't seem
like a good use of time.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Fast GiST index build
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: sha1, sha2 functions into core?