Thread: BUG #14226: pg_upgrade for 8.4 to 9.4 failed
VGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBidWcgaGFzIGJlZW4gbG9nZ2VkIG9uIHRoZSB3ZWJz aXRlOgoKQnVnIHJlZmVyZW5jZTogICAgICAxNDIyNgpMb2dnZWQgYnk6ICAg ICAgICAgIFRpZW4gTmd1eWVuCkVtYWlsIGFkZHJlc3M6ICAgICAgbnF0aWVu MzEwQGdtYWlsLmNvbQpQb3N0Z3JlU1FMIHZlcnNpb246IDkuNC4wCk9wZXJh dGluZyBzeXN0ZW06ICAgR05VL0xpbnV4CkRlc2NyaXB0aW9uOiAgICAgICAg CgpJIGRpZCB0aGUgY2x1c3RlciBjb21wYXRpYmxlIGNoZWNrIHdpdGggIi91 c3IvcGdzcWwtOS40L2Jpbi9wZ191cGdyYWRlIC1jIC1kCi92YXIvbGliL3Bn c3FsL2RhdGEgLUQgL3Zhci9saWIvcGdzcWwvOS40LnRlc3QvZGF0YSAtYiAv dXNyL2Jpbi8gLUIKL3Vzci9wZ3NxbC05LjQvYmluLyIsIGFuZCBpdCBzYXlz ICIqQ2x1c3RlcnMgYXJlIGNvbXBhdGlibGUqIiwgDQoNCkJ1dCB0aGVuIHRo ZSBwcm9jZXNzIHdhcyBmYWlsZWQgd2hlbiBJIHJ1biB0aGUgYWN0dWFsIHVw Z3JhZGUKIi91c3IvcGdzcWwtOS40L2Jpbi9wZ191cGdyYWRlIC1kIC92YXIv bGliL3Bnc3FsL2RhdGEgLUQKL3Zhci9saWIvcGdzcWwvOS40LnRlc3QvZGF0 YSAtYiAvdXNyL2Jpbi8gLUIgL3Vzci9wZ3NxbC05LjQvYmluLw0KDQpJIGNv bnN1bHRlZCB0aGUgbG9nIGFuZCBzYXcgdGhlc2UgZXJyb3JzOg0KLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQpwZ19yZXN0b3JlOiBjcmVhdGluZyBDT05TVFJBSU5U IHlvZGxlZV91c2VyX2FjY291bnRzX3BrZXkNCnBnX3Jlc3RvcmU6IGNyZWF0 aW5nIElOREVYIGNvbmN1cnJlbnRseQ0KcGdfcmVzdG9yZTogW2FyY2hpdmVy IChkYildIEVycm9yIHdoaWxlIFBST0NFU1NJTkcgVE9DOg0KcGdfcmVzdG9y ZTogW2FyY2hpdmVyIChkYildIEVycm9yIGZyb20gVE9DIGVudHJ5IDI2Mzg7 IDEyNTkgMTk3MzggSU5ERVgKY29uY3VycmVudGx5IGJsdWVsZWFmDQpwZ19y ZXN0b3JlOiBbYXJjaGl2ZXIgKGRiKV0gY291bGQgbm90IGV4ZWN1dGUgcXVl cnk6IEVSUk9SOiAgQ1JFQVRFIElOREVYCkNPTkNVUlJFTlRMWSBjYW5ub3Qg YmUgZXhlY3V0ZWQgZnJvbSBhIGZ1bmN0aW9uIG9yIG11bHRpLWNvbW1hbmQg c3RyaW5nDQogICAgQ29tbWFuZCB3YXM6DQotLSBGb3IgYmluYXJ5IHVwZ3Jh ZGUsIG11c3QgcHJlc2VydmUgcGdfY2xhc3Mgb2lkcw0KU0VMRUNUCmJpbmFy eV91cGdyYWRlLnNldF9uZXh0X2luZGV4X3BnX2NsYXNzX29pZCgnMTk3Mzgn OjpwZ19jYXRhbG9nLm9pLi4uDQotLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0NCg0KSSBo YXZlIG5vIGNsdWUgd2hhdCB0aGVzZSBlcnJvcnMgYXJlIGFib3V0LCBwbGVh c2UgaGVscCAuDQoNCgoK
nqtien310@gmail.com writes:
> But then the process was failed when I run the actual upgrade
> "/usr/pgsql-9.4/bin/pg_upgrade -d /var/lib/pgsql/data -D
> /var/lib/pgsql/9.4.test/data -b /usr/bin/ -B /usr/pgsql-9.4/bin/
> I consulted the log and saw these errors:
> ------------------
> pg_restore: creating CONSTRAINT yodlee_user_accounts_pkey
> pg_restore: creating INDEX concurrently
> pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error while PROCESSING TOC:
> pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error from TOC entry 2638; 1259 19738 INDEX
> concurrently blueleaf
> pg_restore: [archiver (db)] could not execute query: ERROR: CREATE INDEX
> CONCURRENTLY cannot be executed from a function or multi-command string
> Command was:
Drop or rename your index named "concurrently".
(PG 9.0 and up seem to quote that index name safely, but 8.4 doesn't,
and it's long out of support.)
regards, tom lane
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:09:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > nqtien310@gmail.com writes: > > But then the process was failed when I run the actual upgrade > > "/usr/pgsql-9.4/bin/pg_upgrade -d /var/lib/pgsql/data -D > > /var/lib/pgsql/9.4.test/data -b /usr/bin/ -B /usr/pgsql-9.4/bin/ > > > I consulted the log and saw these errors: > > ------------------ > > pg_restore: creating CONSTRAINT yodlee_user_accounts_pkey > > pg_restore: creating INDEX concurrently > > pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error while PROCESSING TOC: > > pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error from TOC entry 2638; 1259 19738 INDEX > > concurrently blueleaf > > pg_restore: [archiver (db)] could not execute query: ERROR: CREATE INDEX > > CONCURRENTLY cannot be executed from a function or multi-command string > > Command was: > > Drop or rename your index named "concurrently". > > (PG 9.0 and up seem to quote that index name safely, but 8.4 doesn't, > and it's long out of support.) That is odd because pg_upgrade uses the _new_ 9.4 pg_dump to dump the old cluster. -- 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 +
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:09:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Drop or rename your index named "concurrently".
>>
>> (PG 9.0 and up seem to quote that index name safely, but 8.4 doesn't,
>> and it's long out of support.)
> That is odd because pg_upgrade uses the _new_ 9.4 pg_dump to dump the
> old cluster.
Yeah, but pg_dump depends on the backend to do some of the work,
and 8.4 doesn't have quote-all-identifiers support.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 09:52:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:09:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Drop or rename your index named "concurrently". > >> > >> (PG 9.0 and up seem to quote that index name safely, but 8.4 doesn't, > >> and it's long out of support.) > > > That is odd because pg_upgrade uses the _new_ 9.4 pg_dump to dump the > > old cluster. > > Yeah, but pg_dump depends on the backend to do some of the work, > and 8.4 doesn't have quote-all-identifiers support. Ah, OK, makes sense. -- 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 +