Thread: pg_upgrade invalid option
I've tried following the instructions on this page: http://www.postgresql.org/files/documentation/books/aw_pgsql/node267.html This mentions a -f option but my version of pg_upgrade doesn't appear to support this: /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.0/bin/pg_upgrade: invalid option -- 'f' The only options available are: Options: -b, --old-bindir=old_bindir old cluster executable directory -B, --new-bindir=new_bindir new cluster executable directory -c, --check check clusters only, don't change any data -d, --old-datadir=old_datadir old cluster data directory -D, --new-datadir=new_datadir new cluster data directory -g, --debug enable debugging -G, --debugfile=debug_filename output debugging activity to file -k, --link link instead of copying files to new cluster -l, --logfile=log_filename log session activity to file -p, --old-port=old_portnum old cluster port number (default 5432) -P, --new-port=new_portnum new cluster port number (default 5432) -u, --user=username clusters superuser (default "postgres") -v, --verbose enable verbose output -V, --version display version information, then exit -h, --help show this help, then exit Are those instructions for an older version? Thanks Thom
On 11 June 2010 14:55, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com> wrote: >> I've tried following the instructions on this page: >> http://www.postgresql.org/files/documentation/books/aw_pgsql/node267.html >> >> This mentions a -f option but my version of pg_upgrade doesn't appear >> to support this: >> >> /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.0/bin/pg_upgrade: invalid option -- 'f' >> >> The only options available are: >> > <snip> > >> Are those instructions for an older version? >> > > That's Bruce's book which is probably 8 or 9 years old now. It's > almost certainly referring to the old pg_upgrade shell script from > years ago. > Ah, unfortunately that's the first result in Google. I've resorted to restoring from a full backup :( I don't think I could use it for upgrading from beta 1 to beta 2 anyway by the looks of things. The binary directories are updated since they share the same version number. Thom
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com> wrote: > I've tried following the instructions on this page: > http://www.postgresql.org/files/documentation/books/aw_pgsql/node267.html > > This mentions a -f option but my version of pg_upgrade doesn't appear > to support this: > > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.0/bin/pg_upgrade: invalid option -- 'f' > > The only options available are: > <snip> > Are those instructions for an older version? > That's Bruce's book which is probably 8 or 9 years old now. It's almost certainly referring to the old pg_upgrade shell script from years ago. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
Thom Brown wrote:
> >> The only options available are:
> >>
> > <snip>
> >
> >> Are those instructions for an older version?
> >>
> >
> > That's Bruce's book which is probably 8 or 9 years old now. It's
> > almost certainly referring to the old pg_upgrade shell script from
> > years ago.
> >
>
> Ah, unfortunately that's the first result in Google. I've resorted to
I am sure that will change soon. :-) The right URL is now #7 on
Google:
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/pgupgrade.html
> restoring from a full backup :( I don't think I could use it for
> upgrading from beta 1 to beta 2 anyway by the looks of things. The
> binary directories are updated since they share the same version
> number.
You certainly could have. The docs say:
F.31.1. Supported Versions
pg_upgrade supports upgrades from 8.3.X and later to the current major
release of PostgreSQL, including snapshot and alpha releases.
In fact, we were hoping people would test pg_upgrade during the required
beta2 catalog change.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
On 12 June 2010 18:15, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Thom Brown wrote: >> >> The only options available are: >> >> >> > <snip> >> > >> >> Are those instructions for an older version? >> >> >> > >> > That's Bruce's book which is probably 8 or 9 years old now. It's >> > almost certainly referring to the old pg_upgrade shell script from >> > years ago. >> > >> >> Ah, unfortunately that's the first result in Google. I've resorted to > > I am sure that will change soon. :-) The right URL is now #7 on > Google: > > http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/pgupgrade.html > >> restoring from a full backup :( I don't think I could use it for >> upgrading from beta 1 to beta 2 anyway by the looks of things. The >> binary directories are updated since they share the same version >> number. > > You certainly could have. The docs say: > > F.31.1. Supported Versions > > pg_upgrade supports upgrades from 8.3.X and later to the current major > release of PostgreSQL, including snapshot and alpha releases. > > In fact, we were hoping people would test pg_upgrade during the required > beta2 catalog change. > How would that work if the beta1 binaries are overwritten by the beta2 binaries since they both share the same version number? Thom
Thom Brown wrote: > > I am sure that will change soon. ?:-) ?The right URL is now #7 on > > Google: > > > > ? ? ? ?http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/pgupgrade.html > > > >> restoring from a full backup :( ?I don't think I could use it for > >> upgrading from beta 1 to beta 2 anyway by the looks of things. ?The > >> binary directories are updated since they share the same version > >> number. > > > > You certainly could have. ?The docs say: > > > > ? ? ? ?F.31.1. Supported Versions > > > > ? ? ? ?pg_upgrade supports upgrades from 8.3.X and later to the current major > > ? ? ? ?release of PostgreSQL, including snapshot and alpha releases. > > > > In fact, we were hoping people would test pg_upgrade during the required > > beta2 catalog change. > > > > How would that work if the beta1 binaries are overwritten by the beta2 > binaries since they both share the same version number? Uh, did you look at the URL I mentioned. I talks about renaming the old directory before installing the new installation, if necessary. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + None of us is going to be here forever. +
On 12 June 2010 18:46, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Thom Brown wrote: >> > I am sure that will change soon. ?:-) ?The right URL is now #7 on >> > Google: >> > >> > ? ? ? ?http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/pgupgrade.html >> > >> >> restoring from a full backup :( ?I don't think I could use it for >> >> upgrading from beta 1 to beta 2 anyway by the looks of things. ?The >> >> binary directories are updated since they share the same version >> >> number. >> > >> > You certainly could have. ?The docs say: >> > >> > ? ? ? ?F.31.1. Supported Versions >> > >> > ? ? ? ?pg_upgrade supports upgrades from 8.3.X and later to the current major >> > ? ? ? ?release of PostgreSQL, including snapshot and alpha releases. >> > >> > In fact, we were hoping people would test pg_upgrade during the required >> > beta2 catalog change. >> > >> >> How would that work if the beta1 binaries are overwritten by the beta2 >> binaries since they both share the same version number? > > Uh, did you look at the URL I mentioned. I talks about renaming the old > directory before installing the new installation, if necessary. > Ah, I see. Unfortunately it still wouldn't have helped since I had already installed the new beta. Normally it installs versions in parallel, but not in this case. :/ Had I planned it before installation, I would have ensured the binaries were moved beforehand. Nevermind. :) Thom