Re: [HACKERS] Mismatch of relation names: pg_toast.pg_toast_nnn during pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.1
Jamie Fox wrote: 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. Great. Thanks for the report, and sorry for the bug. --- 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. + -- Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://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
Re: [HACKERS] Mismatch of relation names: pg_toast.pg_toast_nnn during pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.1
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
Re: [HACKERS] Mismatch of relation names: pg_toast.pg_toast_nnn during pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.1
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
Re: [HACKERS] Mismatch of relation names: pg_toast.pg_toast_nnn during pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.1
Thanks, I'm following the thread pg_upgrade automatic testing and will try the patch just detailed there. Jamie 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
Re: [HACKERS] Mismatch of relation names: pg_toast.pg_toast_nnn during pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.1
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.ushttp://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
[HACKERS] Mismatch of relation names: pg_toast.pg_toast_nnn during pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.1
Hi - I've had no problem upgrading copies our qa databases (which are backed up and restored with pg_dump/pg_restore) but have run into the same problem each time I try to upgrade a copy of our production database (backed up and restored via PITR). After verifying a successful restore and vacuum analyze, I ran a successful pg_upgrade check run with: pg_upgrade -b /usr/local/pgsql-8.4.2/bin -B /usr/local/pgsql-9.1.0/bin -c -d /data/pgsql/prod-84 -D /data/pgsql/prod-91 -G /home/postgres/pg_upgrade_prod.check.debug -k -l /home/postgres/pg_upgrade_prod.check.log -p 5435 -P 5436 -v Then when I ran the actual pg_upgrade: pg_upgrade -b /usr/local/pgsql-8.4.2/bin -B /usr/local/pgsql-9.1.0/bin -d /data/pgsql/prod-84 -D /data/pgsql/prod-91 -G /home/postgres/pg_upgrade_prod.debug -k -l /home/postgres/pg_upgrade_prod.log -p 5435 -P 5436 -v 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 These are the log files generated: -rw-rw-r-- 1 postgres postgres 0 Sep 27 12:47 pg_upgrade_prod.check.debug -rw-rw-r-- 1 postgres postgres 8524 Sep 27 13:27 pg_upgrade_prod.check.log -rw-rw-r-- 1 postgres postgres 0 Sep 27 13:31 pg_upgrade_prod.debug -rw-rw-r-- 1 postgres postgres 2374 Sep 27 14:12 pg_upgrade_dump_globals.sql -rw-rw-r-- 1 postgres postgres 257696 Sep 27 14:12 pg_upgrade_dump_db.sql -rw-rw-r-- 1 postgres postgres 260092 Sep 27 14:12 pg_upgrade_dump_all.sql -rw-rw-r-- 1 postgres postgres 75413 Sep 27 14:12 pg_upgrade_prod.log I don't see any helpful (to me) explanation within them, but after some searching ran across this comment in the relevant section of source: 00059 /* 00060 * In pre-8.4, TOAST table names change during CLUSTER; in = 8.4 00061 * TOAST relation names always use heap table oids, hence we cannot 00062 * check relation names when upgrading from pre-8.4. 00063 */ At this point I still don't understand the underlying issue. Our databases were migrated in place (linked) with pg_migrator from 8.3 to 8.4 could that be the cause or related? Where would you recommend I look to discover a cause and hopefully a solution? Thanks in advance, Jamie -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
