Re: Problem with pg_upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

If something was wrong with the cluster, why did vacuumdb on new server run
successfully when I followed Craig's suggestion of running vacuumdb on old
server first, before performing the upgrade, and then ran vacuumdb on new
one?

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 04:03:38PM -0400, Payal Singh wrote:
> > The omnipitr-backup-slave process takes online backups from the standby,
> and
> > this is done everyday. This process connects to the master and calls a
> > pg_start_backup and then looks for a restore point on the standby after
> that
> > WAL address. So i don't think I need to shut down the server.
>
> My guess is if you try pg_upgrade without omnipitr-backup-slave, and it
> works, odds are something about your use of omnipitr-backup-slave is
> wrong.
>
> > Also, it is the omnipitr-backup-slave process that makes a separate
> backup for
> > xlog.
> >
> >
> >     If you run vacuumedb now, does everything later work fine?
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure about that. Didn't try anything else after that. The
> 9.2beta2
> > server starts without errors though.
>
> True, but it seems like something it wrong about the cluster, as is
> shown by vacuumdb.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Payal
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >
> >     On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 02:22:28PM -0400, Payal Singh wrote:
> >     > The first message in the log is probably because the backup is
> taken from
> >     a
> >     > standby. I am using omnipitr-backup-slave to make the backups and
> then
> >     > restoring one of those.
> >
> >     OK, this is what I wanted to see.  Is the server running while you
> are
> >     taking these backups, because that will not work.
> >
> >     > The whole process that I followed is:
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >  1. Restoring backup file:
> >     >  2.
> >     >  3. payal@sparedb1:/data/pg$ sudo tar -xvzf
> /mnt/nas/backups/postgres/
> >     >     userslave2/backups/data/
> >     userslave2.int.functionx.net-xlog-2012-07-03.tar.gz
> >
> >     > 489. payal@sparedb1:/data/pg$ sudo tar -xvzf
> /mnt/nas/backups/postgres/
> >     >     userslave2/backups/data/
> >     userslave2.int.functionx.net-xlog-2012-07-03.tar.gz
> >     > 490. 9.1/pg_xlog/
> >     > 491. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C00000070
> >     > 492. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C0000006B.009707C0.backup
> >     > 493. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C0000006D
> >     > 494. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C0000006C
> >     > 495. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C0000006B
> >     > 496. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C0000006E
> >     > 497. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C00000071
> >     > 498. 9.1/pg_xlog/000000010000027C0000006F
> >
> >     Why is the xlog backup a separate step?  Because it is a separate
> file
> >     system?  The system is down, I assume.
> >
> >     If you run vacuumedb now, does everything later work fine?
> >
> >     --
> >       Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
> >       EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
> >
> >       + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Payal Singh
> > Graduate Student
> > Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
> > University of Maryland, Baltimore County
>
> --
>   Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
>   EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
>
>   + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
>



--
Payal Singh
Graduate Student
Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
University of Maryland, Baltimore County