I regret that as a part-timer recently brought back on here I didn't get an opportunity to test this earlier. The upgrade with the patch worked fine on my first attempt.
Thanks again, Jamie On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Jamie Fox wrote: >> Thanks, I'm following the thread "pg_upgrade automatic testing" and >> will try the patch just detailed there. > > I have applied the patch to head and 9.1.X. We still have a win32 bug > to fix. It is a shame I was not able to fix these before 9.1.1 was > released. :-( > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: >> > On tis, 2011-09-27 at 16:19 -0700, Jamie Fox wrote: >> >> >> >> It fails at this stage: >> >> >> >> ? ? Restoring user relation files >> >> ? ? linking /data/pgsql/prod-84/base/11564/2613 to >> >> /data/pgsql/prod-91/base/12698/12570 >> >> ? ? linking /data/pgsql/prod-84/base/11564/2683 to >> >> /data/pgsql/prod-91/base/12698/12572 >> >> ? ? Mismatch of relation names: database "prod1", old rel >> >> pg_toast.pg_toast_54542379, new rel pg_toast.pg_toast_16735 >> >> ? ? Failure, exiting >> > >> > This issue is known and a fix is currently being discussed. >> > >> > >> >> -- >> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) >> To make changes to your subscription: >> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > > -- > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us > EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com > > + It's impossible for everything to be true. + > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
