On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:07:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think possibly the easiest fix for this is to have pg_upgrade,
> instead of RESETting a nonexistent option, RESET something that's
> still considered to require AccessExclusiveLock. "user_catalog_table"
> would work, looks like; though I'd want to annotate its entry in
> reloptions.c to warn people away from downgrading its lock level.
>
> More generally, though, I wonder how we can have some test coverage
> on such cases going forward. Is the patch below too ugly to commit
> permanently, and if so, what other idea can you suggest?
FYI, I only test _supported_ version combinations for pg_upgrade, i.e. I
don't test pg_upgrade _from_ unsupported versions, though I can see why
maybe I should.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
