Thread: pg_upgrade 10.2

pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:

In older versions of pg_upgrade (e.g from 9.2 to 9.3), I was able to run pg_upgrade without stopping old cluster using the check flag.

 

pg_upgrade -b <old-bin> -B <new-bin> -d <old-data> -D <new-data> -p 5432 -P 5434 -r -v -k -c      

 

Note the “c” flag at the end

 

However pg_upgrade in 10 (I tried from 9.3 to 10.4), when I did not stop the old cluster, the upgrade failed:

 

***

There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.

Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.

Failure, exiting

 

Is this expected?

 

Also, when I stopped the old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with “-c” flag, the file global/pg_control got renamed to global/pg_control.old. The “-c” flag never renamed anything in the old cluster in older pg_upgrade

 

 

Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 01:34 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> In older versions of pg_upgrade (e.g from 9.2 to 9.3), I was able to run 
> pg_upgrade without stopping old cluster using the check flag.
> 
> pg_upgrade -b <old-bin> -B <new-bin> -d <old-data> -D <new-data> -p 5432 
> -P 5434 -r -v -k -c
> 
> Note the “c” flag at the end

I take the below to it mean it should work:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgupgrade.html
> "You can use pg_upgrade --check to perform only the checks, even if the 
old server is still running. pg_upgrade --check will also outline any 
manual adjustments you will need to make after the upgrade. If you are 
going to be using link mode, you should use the --link option with 
--check to enable link-mode-specific checks."

Might want to try without -k to see what happens.

More comments below.

> However pg_upgrade in 10 (I tried from 9.3 to 10.4), when I did not stop 
> the old cluster, the upgrade failed:
> 
> ***
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> 
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> 
> Failure, exiting
> 
> Is this expected?
> 
> Also, when I stopped the old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with “-c” flag, 
> the file global/pg_control got renamed to global/pg_control.old. The 
> “-c” flag never renamed anything in the old cluster in older pg_upgrade

Again seems related to -k:

"
If you ran pg_upgrade without --link or did not start the new server, 
the old cluster was not modified except that, if linking started, a .old 
suffix was appended to $PGDATA/global/pg_control. To reuse the old 
cluster, possibly remove the .old suffix from $PGDATA/global/pg_control; 
you can then restart the old cluster.
"
> 


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 01:34 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> In older versions of pg_upgrade (e.g from 9.2 to 9.3), I was able to run 
> pg_upgrade without stopping old cluster using the check flag.
> 
> pg_upgrade -b <old-bin> -B <new-bin> -d <old-data> -D <new-data> -p 5432 
> -P 5434 -r -v -k -c
> 
> Note the “c” flag at the end

I take the below to it mean it should work:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgupgrade.html
> "You can use pg_upgrade --check to perform only the checks, even if the 
old server is still running. pg_upgrade --check will also outline any 
manual adjustments you will need to make after the upgrade. If you are 
going to be using link mode, you should use the --link option with 
--check to enable link-mode-specific checks."

Might want to try without -k to see what happens.

More comments below.

> However pg_upgrade in 10 (I tried from 9.3 to 10.4), when I did not stop 
> the old cluster, the upgrade failed:
> 
> ***
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> 
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> 
> Failure, exiting
> 
> Is this expected?
> 
> Also, when I stopped the old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with “-c” flag, 
> the file global/pg_control got renamed to global/pg_control.old. The 
> “-c” flag never renamed anything in the old cluster in older pg_upgrade

Again seems related to -k:

"
If you ran pg_upgrade without --link or did not start the new server, 
the old cluster was not modified except that, if linking started, a .old 
suffix was appended to $PGDATA/global/pg_control. To reuse the old 
cluster, possibly remove the .old suffix from $PGDATA/global/pg_control; 
you can then restart the old cluster.
"
> 


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 01:34 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> In older versions of pg_upgrade (e.g from 9.2 to 9.3), I was able to run 
> pg_upgrade without stopping old cluster using the check flag.
> 
> pg_upgrade -b <old-bin> -B <new-bin> -d <old-data> -D <new-data> -p 5432 
> -P 5434 -r -v -k -c
> 
> Note the “c” flag at the end

I take the below to it mean it should work:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgupgrade.html
> "You can use pg_upgrade --check to perform only the checks, even if the 
old server is still running. pg_upgrade --check will also outline any 
manual adjustments you will need to make after the upgrade. If you are 
going to be using link mode, you should use the --link option with 
--check to enable link-mode-specific checks."

Might want to try without -k to see what happens.

More comments below.

> However pg_upgrade in 10 (I tried from 9.3 to 10.4), when I did not stop 
> the old cluster, the upgrade failed:
> 
> ***
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> 
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> 
> Failure, exiting
> 
> Is this expected?
> 
> Also, when I stopped the old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with “-c” flag, 
> the file global/pg_control got renamed to global/pg_control.old. The 
> “-c” flag never renamed anything in the old cluster in older pg_upgrade

Again seems related to -k:

"
If you ran pg_upgrade without --link or did not start the new server, 
the old cluster was not modified except that, if linking started, a .old 
suffix was appended to $PGDATA/global/pg_control. To reuse the old 
cluster, possibly remove the .old suffix from $PGDATA/global/pg_control; 
you can then restart the old cluster.
"
> 


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Thanks Adrian.
I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.

There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
Failure, exiting

-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3:48 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 01:34 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> In older versions of pg_upgrade (e.g from 9.2 to 9.3), I was able to
> run pg_upgrade without stopping old cluster using the check flag.
>
> pg_upgrade -b <old-bin> -B <new-bin> -d <old-data> -D <new-data> -p
> 5432 -P 5434 -r -v -k -c
>
> Note the "c" flag at the end

I take the below to it mean it should work:


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.postgresql.org_docs_10_static_pgupgrade.html&d=DwID-g&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=0wrsmPzpZSao0v32yCcG2Q&m=g2e1NMngBLIcEgi5UjlCHkyJ5zK1Su-vsaRw0Y9N0Dc&s=PDVmjA_uW6cJvV4lWR8vgkiArplzgd5Rs4taLA6ZY6Q&e=
> "You can use pg_upgrade --check to perform only the checks, even if
> the
old server is still running. pg_upgrade --check will also outline any manual adjustments you will need to make after
theupgrade. If you are going to be using link mode, you should use the --link option with --check to enable
link-mode-specificchecks." 

Might want to try without -k to see what happens.

More comments below.

> However pg_upgrade in 10 (I tried from 9.3 to 10.4), when I did not
> stop the old cluster, the upgrade failed:
>
> ***
>
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
>
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
>
> Failure, exiting
>
> Is this expected?
>
> Also, when I stopped the old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with "-c"
> flag, the file global/pg_control got renamed to global/pg_control.old.
> The "-c" flag never renamed anything in the old cluster in older
> pg_upgrade

Again seems related to -k:

"
If you ran pg_upgrade without --link or did not start the new server, the old cluster was not modified except that, if
linkingstarted, a .old suffix was appended to $PGDATA/global/pg_control. To reuse the old cluster, possibly remove the
.oldsuffix from $PGDATA/global/pg_control; you can then restart the old cluster. 
"
>


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Thanks Adrian.
I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.

There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
Failure, exiting

-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3:48 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 01:34 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> In older versions of pg_upgrade (e.g from 9.2 to 9.3), I was able to
> run pg_upgrade without stopping old cluster using the check flag.
>
> pg_upgrade -b <old-bin> -B <new-bin> -d <old-data> -D <new-data> -p
> 5432 -P 5434 -r -v -k -c
>
> Note the "c" flag at the end

I take the below to it mean it should work:


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.postgresql.org_docs_10_static_pgupgrade.html&d=DwID-g&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=0wrsmPzpZSao0v32yCcG2Q&m=g2e1NMngBLIcEgi5UjlCHkyJ5zK1Su-vsaRw0Y9N0Dc&s=PDVmjA_uW6cJvV4lWR8vgkiArplzgd5Rs4taLA6ZY6Q&e=
> "You can use pg_upgrade --check to perform only the checks, even if
> the
old server is still running. pg_upgrade --check will also outline any manual adjustments you will need to make after
theupgrade. If you are going to be using link mode, you should use the --link option with --check to enable
link-mode-specificchecks." 

Might want to try without -k to see what happens.

More comments below.

> However pg_upgrade in 10 (I tried from 9.3 to 10.4), when I did not
> stop the old cluster, the upgrade failed:
>
> ***
>
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
>
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
>
> Failure, exiting
>
> Is this expected?
>
> Also, when I stopped the old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with "-c"
> flag, the file global/pg_control got renamed to global/pg_control.old.
> The "-c" flag never renamed anything in the old cluster in older
> pg_upgrade

Again seems related to -k:

"
If you ran pg_upgrade without --link or did not start the new server, the old cluster was not modified except that, if
linkingstarted, a .old suffix was appended to $PGDATA/global/pg_control. To reuse the old cluster, possibly remove the
.oldsuffix from $PGDATA/global/pg_control; you can then restart the old cluster. 
"
>


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Thanks Adrian.
I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.

There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
Failure, exiting

-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3:48 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 01:34 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> In older versions of pg_upgrade (e.g from 9.2 to 9.3), I was able to
> run pg_upgrade without stopping old cluster using the check flag.
>
> pg_upgrade -b <old-bin> -B <new-bin> -d <old-data> -D <new-data> -p
> 5432 -P 5434 -r -v -k -c
>
> Note the "c" flag at the end

I take the below to it mean it should work:


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.postgresql.org_docs_10_static_pgupgrade.html&d=DwID-g&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=0wrsmPzpZSao0v32yCcG2Q&m=g2e1NMngBLIcEgi5UjlCHkyJ5zK1Su-vsaRw0Y9N0Dc&s=PDVmjA_uW6cJvV4lWR8vgkiArplzgd5Rs4taLA6ZY6Q&e=
> "You can use pg_upgrade --check to perform only the checks, even if
> the
old server is still running. pg_upgrade --check will also outline any manual adjustments you will need to make after
theupgrade. If you are going to be using link mode, you should use the --link option with --check to enable
link-mode-specificchecks." 

Might want to try without -k to see what happens.

More comments below.

> However pg_upgrade in 10 (I tried from 9.3 to 10.4), when I did not
> stop the old cluster, the upgrade failed:
>
> ***
>
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
>
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
>
> Failure, exiting
>
> Is this expected?
>
> Also, when I stopped the old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with "-c"
> flag, the file global/pg_control got renamed to global/pg_control.old.
> The "-c" flag never renamed anything in the old cluster in older
> pg_upgrade

Again seems related to -k:

"
If you ran pg_upgrade without --link or did not start the new server, the old cluster was not modified except that, if
linkingstarted, a .old suffix was appended to $PGDATA/global/pg_control. To reuse the old cluster, possibly remove the
.oldsuffix from $PGDATA/global/pg_control; you can then restart the old cluster. 
"
>


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 01:58 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Thanks Adrian.
> I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> Failure, exiting
> 

Well according to the code in pg_upgrade.c that message should not be 
reached when the check option is specified:

if (!user_opts.check)
         pg_fatal("There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old 
cluster.\n"
             "Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.\n");
else
         *live_check = true;

Can we see the actual command you ran?


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 01:58 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Thanks Adrian.
> I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> Failure, exiting
> 

Well according to the code in pg_upgrade.c that message should not be 
reached when the check option is specified:

if (!user_opts.check)
         pg_fatal("There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old 
cluster.\n"
             "Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.\n");
else
         *live_check = true;

Can we see the actual command you ran?


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 01:58 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Thanks Adrian.
> I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> Failure, exiting
> 

Well according to the code in pg_upgrade.c that message should not be 
reached when the check option is specified:

if (!user_opts.check)
         pg_fatal("There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old 
cluster.\n"
             "Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.\n");
else
         *live_check = true;

Can we see the actual command you ran?


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
pg_upgrade -V
pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4

pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
/data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last-D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 -P 5434 -r -v –c
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:13 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 01:58 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Thanks Adrian.
> I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> Failure, exiting
> 

Well according to the code in pg_upgrade.c that message should not be reached when the check option is specified:

if (!user_opts.check)
         pg_fatal("There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.\n"
             "Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.\n"); else
         *live_check = true;

Can we see the actual command you ran?


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
pg_upgrade -V
pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4

pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
/data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last-D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 -P 5434 -r -v –c
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:13 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 01:58 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Thanks Adrian.
> I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> Failure, exiting
> 

Well according to the code in pg_upgrade.c that message should not be reached when the check option is specified:

if (!user_opts.check)
         pg_fatal("There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.\n"
             "Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.\n"); else
         *live_check = true;

Can we see the actual command you ran?


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
pg_upgrade -V
pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4

pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
/data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last-D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 -P 5434 -r -v –c
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:13 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 01:58 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Thanks Adrian.
> I removed "-k" flag. But still got same error.
> 
> There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.
> Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.
> Failure, exiting
> 

Well according to the code in pg_upgrade.c that message should not be reached when the check option is specified:

if (!user_opts.check)
         pg_fatal("There seems to be a postmaster servicing the old cluster.\n"
             "Please shutdown that postmaster and try again.\n"); else
         *live_check = true;

Can we see the actual command you ran?


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> pg_upgrade -V
> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
> 
> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
/data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last-D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 -P 5434 -r -v –c
 
> 
>

Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your 
original post you had:

-p 5432

and above you have:

-p 5433

Not sure if that makes a difference.

The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of 
the line to somewhere earlier on the chance that there is a bug that is 
not finding it when it's at the end.


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> pg_upgrade -V
> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
> 
> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
/data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last-D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 -P 5434 -r -v –c
 
> 
>

Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your 
original post you had:

-p 5432

and above you have:

-p 5433

Not sure if that makes a difference.

The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of 
the line to somewhere earlier on the chance that there is a bug that is 
not finding it when it's at the end.


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> pg_upgrade -V
> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
> 
> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
/data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last-D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 -P 5434 -r -v –c
 
> 
>

Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your 
original post you had:

-p 5432

and above you have:

-p 5433

Not sure if that makes a difference.

The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of 
the line to somewhere earlier on the chance that there is a bug that is 
not finding it when it's at the end.


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Hi Adrian,

Port numbers are correct.

I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However, I
amrunning into a different problem.
 

New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
Failure, exiting

Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.

Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the
endof the command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded in that attempt. Is that possible?
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> pg_upgrade -V
> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
> 
> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B 
> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d 
> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 
> -P 5434 -r -v –c
> 
>

Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:

-p 5432

and above you have:

-p 5433

Not sure if that makes a difference.

The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance that
thereis a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end.
 


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Hi Adrian,

Port numbers are correct.

I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However, I
amrunning into a different problem.
 

New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
Failure, exiting

Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.

Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the
endof the command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded in that attempt. Is that possible?
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> pg_upgrade -V
> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
> 
> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B 
> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d 
> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 
> -P 5434 -r -v –c
> 
>

Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:

-p 5432

and above you have:

-p 5433

Not sure if that makes a difference.

The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance that
thereis a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end.
 


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Hi Adrian,

Port numbers are correct.

I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However, I
amrunning into a different problem.
 

New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
Failure, exiting

Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.

Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the
endof the command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded in that attempt. Is that possible?
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> pg_upgrade -V
> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
> 
> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B 
> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d 
> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 
> -P 5434 -r -v –c
> 
>

Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:

-p 5432

and above you have:

-p 5433

Not sure if that makes a difference.

The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance that
thereis a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end.
 


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Jerry Sievers
Date:
Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem. 

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a
regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever dash char.

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent
parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of
fun ways so lordy knows just what you originally sent :-)

FWIW


>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
> Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433
>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>>
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end. 
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Jerry Sievers
Date:
Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem. 

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a
regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever dash char.

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent
parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of
fun ways so lordy knows just what you originally sent :-)

FWIW


>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
> Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433
>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>>
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end. 
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Jerry Sievers
Date:
Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem. 

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a
regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever dash char.

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent
parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of
fun ways so lordy knows just what you originally sent :-)

FWIW


>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
> Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433
>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>>
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end. 
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800


RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Jerry,

OMG, I think you nailed this... I know what I did. I cut/pasted the command from an e-mail... I have seen this issue
beforewith stuff not related to postgres. But then those commands failed in syntax error and then you know what you did
wrong.

Similarly, I expect pg_upgrade to throw an error if it finds something it doesn't understand instead of ignoring and
causingdamage. Don't you agree?
 

Thanks for pointing that out. I will redo my upgrade.

-r -v -k -c    --- good flags no utf8
-r -v -k –c    --- bad flags....




-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Sievers [mailto:gsievers19@comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 6:24 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem.
 

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever
dashchar.
 

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of fun ways so lordy knows just what you
originallysent :-)
 

FWIW


>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I 
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the 
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded 
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; 
> pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; 
> pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>> 
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B 
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d 
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 
>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>> 
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end.
 
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800

RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Jerry,

OMG, I think you nailed this... I know what I did. I cut/pasted the command from an e-mail... I have seen this issue
beforewith stuff not related to postgres. But then those commands failed in syntax error and then you know what you did
wrong.

Similarly, I expect pg_upgrade to throw an error if it finds something it doesn't understand instead of ignoring and
causingdamage. Don't you agree?
 

Thanks for pointing that out. I will redo my upgrade.

-r -v -k -c    --- good flags no utf8
-r -v -k –c    --- bad flags....




-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Sievers [mailto:gsievers19@comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 6:24 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem.
 

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever
dashchar.
 

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of fun ways so lordy knows just what you
originallysent :-)
 

FWIW


>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I 
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the 
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded 
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; 
> pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; 
> pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>> 
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B 
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d 
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 
>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>> 
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end.
 
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800

RE: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Murthy Nunna
Date:
Jerry,

OMG, I think you nailed this... I know what I did. I cut/pasted the command from an e-mail... I have seen this issue
beforewith stuff not related to postgres. But then those commands failed in syntax error and then you know what you did
wrong.

Similarly, I expect pg_upgrade to throw an error if it finds something it doesn't understand instead of ignoring and
causingdamage. Don't you agree?
 

Thanks for pointing that out. I will redo my upgrade.

-r -v -k -c    --- good flags no utf8
-r -v -k –c    --- bad flags....




-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Sievers [mailto:gsievers19@comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 6:24 PM
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem.
 

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever
dashchar.
 

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of fun ways so lordy knows just what you
originallysent :-)
 

FWIW


>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I 
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the 
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded 
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; 
> pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; 
> pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>> 
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B 
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d 
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433 
>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>> 
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end.
 
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800

Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 02:49 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
> 
> Port numbers are correct.
> 
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem.
 
> 
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
> Failure, exiting
> 
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
> 
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the
endof the command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded in that attempt. Is that possible?
 

I don't so because it exited before it got the upgrading part.


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 02:49 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
> 
> Port numbers are correct.
> 
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem.
 
> 
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
> Failure, exiting
> 
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
> 
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the
endof the command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded in that attempt. Is that possible?
 

I don't so because it exited before it got the upgrading part.


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Adrian Klaver
Date:
On 06/12/2018 02:49 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
> 
> Port numbers are correct.
> 
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem.
 
> 
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
> Failure, exiting
> 
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
> 
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the
endof the command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded in that attempt. Is that possible?
 

I don't so because it exited before it got the upgrading part.


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Jerry Sievers
Date:
Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Jerry,
>
> OMG, I think you nailed this... I know what I did. I cut/pasted the
> command from an e-mail... I have seen this issue before with stuff not

Oh!  I suggest you lose that habit ASAP before ever issuing another
command to anything :-)

> related to postgres. But then those commands failed in syntax error
> and then you know what you did wrong.
>
> Similarly, I expect pg_upgrade to throw an error if it finds something it doesn't understand instead of ignoring and
causingdamage. Don't you agree? 

Well, pg_upgrade might never have seen your $silly-dash since possibly
your shell or terminal driver swallowed it.

>
> Thanks for pointing that out. I will redo my upgrade.
>
> -r -v -k -c    --- good flags no utf8
> -r -v -k –c    --- bad flags....
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Sievers [mailto:gsievers19@comcast.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 6:24 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
> Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:
>
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> Port numbers are correct.
>>
>> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem. 
>
> I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever
dashchar. 
>
> I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.
>
> But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of fun ways so lordy knows just what you
originallysent :-) 
>
> FWIW
>
>
>>
>> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty Failure, exiting
>>
>> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>>
>> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
>> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
>> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
>> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
>> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>;
>> pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
>> pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
>> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>>
>> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>>> pg_upgrade -V
>>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>>
>>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B
>>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
>>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433
>>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>>
>> -p 5432
>>
>> and above you have:
>>
>> -p 5433
>>
>> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>>
>> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end. 
>>
>>
>> --
>> Adrian Klaver
>> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
>
> --
> Jerry Sievers
> Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
> e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
> p: 312.241.7800

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Jerry Sievers
Date:
Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Jerry,
>
> OMG, I think you nailed this... I know what I did. I cut/pasted the
> command from an e-mail... I have seen this issue before with stuff not

Oh!  I suggest you lose that habit ASAP before ever issuing another
command to anything :-)

> related to postgres. But then those commands failed in syntax error
> and then you know what you did wrong.
>
> Similarly, I expect pg_upgrade to throw an error if it finds something it doesn't understand instead of ignoring and
causingdamage. Don't you agree? 

Well, pg_upgrade might never have seen your $silly-dash since possibly
your shell or terminal driver swallowed it.

>
> Thanks for pointing that out. I will redo my upgrade.
>
> -r -v -k -c    --- good flags no utf8
> -r -v -k –c    --- bad flags....
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Sievers [mailto:gsievers19@comcast.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 6:24 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
> Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:
>
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> Port numbers are correct.
>>
>> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem. 
>
> I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever
dashchar. 
>
> I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.
>
> But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of fun ways so lordy knows just what you
originallysent :-) 
>
> FWIW
>
>
>>
>> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty Failure, exiting
>>
>> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>>
>> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
>> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
>> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
>> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
>> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>;
>> pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
>> pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
>> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>>
>> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>>> pg_upgrade -V
>>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>>
>>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B
>>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
>>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433
>>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>>
>> -p 5432
>>
>> and above you have:
>>
>> -p 5433
>>
>> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>>
>> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end. 
>>
>>
>> --
>> Adrian Klaver
>> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
>
> --
> Jerry Sievers
> Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
> e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
> p: 312.241.7800

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Jerry Sievers
Date:
Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Jerry,
>
> OMG, I think you nailed this... I know what I did. I cut/pasted the
> command from an e-mail... I have seen this issue before with stuff not

Oh!  I suggest you lose that habit ASAP before ever issuing another
command to anything :-)

> related to postgres. But then those commands failed in syntax error
> and then you know what you did wrong.
>
> Similarly, I expect pg_upgrade to throw an error if it finds something it doesn't understand instead of ignoring and
causingdamage. Don't you agree? 

Well, pg_upgrade might never have seen your $silly-dash since possibly
your shell or terminal driver swallowed it.

>
> Thanks for pointing that out. I will redo my upgrade.
>
> -r -v -k -c    --- good flags no utf8
> -r -v -k –c    --- bad flags....
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Sievers [mailto:gsievers19@comcast.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 6:24 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
> Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:
>
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> Port numbers are correct.
>>
>> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT complaining about old cluster running. However,
Iam running into a different problem. 
>
> I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever
dashchar. 
>
> I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.
>
> But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of fun ways so lordy knows just what you
originallysent :-) 
>
> FWIW
>
>
>>
>> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty Failure, exiting
>>
>> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>>
>> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
>> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
>> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
>> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
>> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>;
>> pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org;
>> pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
>> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>>
>> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>>> pg_upgrade -V
>>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>>
>>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B
>>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d
>>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433
>>> -P 5434 -r -v –c
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original post you had:
>>
>> -p 5432
>>
>> and above you have:
>>
>> -p 5433
>>
>> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>>
>> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of the line to somewhere earlier on the chance
thatthere is a bug that is not finding it when it's at the end. 
>>
>>
>> --
>> Adrian Klaver
>> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
>
> --
> Jerry Sievers
> Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
> e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
> p: 312.241.7800

--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800


Re: pg_upgrade 10.2

From
Jerry Sievers
Date:
Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

<snip>

BTW, this message was and remained cross-posted to 3 groups which is
considered bad style around here and I was negligent too in the previous
reply which also went out to all of them.

Please take note.

Thank


-- 
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800