Re: pg_upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_upgrade
Date
Msg-id 7302.1552948648@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_upgrade  (Tomasz Szypowski <tomasz.szypowski@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pg_upgrade  (Tomasz Szypowski <tomasz.szypowski@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
Tomasz Szypowski <tomasz.szypowski@gmail.com> writes:
> So what set it to false?

I was hoping you'd tell me ;-).  If it's not false in the old cluster,
though, that theory is all wet.

I wonder if you're somehow using the wrong version of pg_upgrade or
pg_dump.  There are cross-checks about that in pg_upgrade, but it
looks like they only check the major version number --- if we'd changed
anything about this in a minor release (which I think we did), it might
be possible to get burnt if you were using pg_upgrade or pg_dump from a
prior minor release.  What are all the versions involved, exactly?

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #15700: PG 10 vs. 11: Large increase in memory usage whenselecting BYTEA data (maybe memory leak)
Next
From: Tomasz Szypowski
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade