On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:24:17AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Yes, I did think about that, but it seems like a behavior change.
However, it is tempting to avoid future bug reports about this.
When this came up in March,
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:24:17AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
I think the reason nobody's responding is because nobody has anything
significant to add. It's a behavior change from not-working to
working. Why wouldn't it be backpatched?
OK, Greg seems to
On 2014-09-11 16:58:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:24:17AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
I think the reason nobody's responding is because nobody has anything
significant to add. It's a behavior change from not-working to
working.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 04:58:12PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:24:17AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
I think the reason nobody's responding is because nobody has anything
significant to add. It's a behavior change from not-working to
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 09:30:06AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 07:35:42PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:26:55AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I have developed the attached
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Yes, I did think about that, but it seems like a behavior change.
However, it is tempting to avoid future bug reports about this.
When this came up in March, Tom and I agreed that this wasn't something
we wanted to slip
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 07:35:42PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:26:55AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I have developed the attached patch which causes pg_upgrade to preserve
the transaction epoch.
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:38:55PM -0700, Sergey Konoplev wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:41:41PM -0700, Sergey Konoplev wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Sergey, are you
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I have developed the attached patch which causes pg_upgrade to preserve
the transaction epoch. I plan to apply this for PG 9.5.
I would say this is a simple bug and should be back patched to 9.4 and
9.3. We're only going to
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:26:55AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I have developed the attached patch which causes pg_upgrade to preserve
the transaction epoch. I plan to apply this for PG 9.5.
I would say this is a simple
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:41:41PM -0700, Sergey Konoplev wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Sergey, are you seeing a problem only because you are
interacting with other systems that didn't reset their epoch?
I faced this after upgrading clusters
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:41:41PM -0700, Sergey Konoplev wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Sergey, are you seeing a problem only because you are
interacting with other systems
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 07:08:42AM +0400, Sergey Burladyan wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Sergey Konoplev gray...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, I didn't manage to make a test case yet. Recently, when I was
migrating several servers to skytools3 and upgrading from 9.0 to 9.2,
I
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Sergey, are you seeing a problem only because you are
interacting with other systems that didn't reset their epoch?
I faced this after upgrading clusters with PgQ Skytools3 installed
only. They didn't interact with any other
Hi All!
Current pg_upgrade copy XID into new cluster, but not it epoch. Why?
Without epoch from old cluster txid_current() in upgraded database return
lower value than before upgrade. This break, for example, PgQ and it must
be fixed by hand after upgrade with pg_resetxlog.
PS: see
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Sergey Burladyan eshkin...@gmail.com wrote:
Current pg_upgrade copy XID into new cluster, but not it epoch. Why?
Without epoch from old cluster txid_current() in upgraded database return
lower value than before upgrade. This break, for example, PgQ and it must
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Sergey Konoplev gray...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, I didn't manage to make a test case yet. Recently, when I was
migrating several servers to skytools3 and upgrading from 9.0 to 9.2,
I noticed that epoch was copied, timeline id was 0 after upgrade, but
...
This
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Sergey Burladyan eshkin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Sergey Konoplev gray...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, I didn't manage to make a test case yet. Recently, when I was
migrating several servers to skytools3 and upgrading from 9.0 to 9.2,
I
18 matches
Mail list logo
