Re: Damaged (during upgrade?) table, how to repair? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Adrian Klaver
Subject Re: Damaged (during upgrade?) table, how to repair?
Date
Msg-id a0cc123d-c673-d909-ac90-3d6ac1d9842b@aklaver.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Damaged (during upgrade?) table, how to repair?  ("W.P." <laurentp@wp.pl>)
Responses Re: Damaged (during upgrade?) table, how to repair?  ("W.P." <laurentp@wp.pl>)
List pgsql-general
On 7/2/21 10:18 AM, W.P. wrote:
> W dniu 02.07.2021 o 17:16, Adrian Klaver pisze:

>>
>> So you have backup of the failed machine's disk stored somewhere else?
> 
> 
> No, I have disc from this machine, looks not damaged (random files). 
> Only problem that OS does not boot beyond "emergency mode".

I would say your second sentence contradicts your first.

In any case, we got to this point as the upgrade(more information on how 
that was done would be nice) from the 9.5 instance to 11.12 failed. 
Given that there is good chance that was due to corruption of files in 
the Postgres cluster on the above disc, it is very probable that going 
back to that disk will repeat the problem. Still see more below.


> 
>>
>> Otherwise how are you going to get the 9.5 instance to the new machine?
>>
> In modern Postgres I've seen there is possibility to have several 
> (different versions) "clusters" on same machine.
> 
> My question (for now) is how to do it?

I'm going to say the easiest way to do this on the new machine would be 
to build 9.5 from source:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/installation.html

https://www.postgresql.org/ftp/source/v9.5.25/

This will require installing development packages on your new machine.

> 
> (I can see PG10 somewhere in /usr/pgsql/postgresql-10/ - bin, lib, 
> share, postgresql-9.6 is empty).

Where do you see the above, old machine or new machine?

> 
> 
> Laurent
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "W.P."
Date:
Subject: Re: Damaged (during upgrade?) table, how to repair?
Next
From: Ray O'Donnell
Date:
Subject: Re: Overlapping timestamptz ranges with priority