Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency

From: Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Hilbert, Sebastian" <Sebastian(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency
Date: 2013-12-02 18:47:51
Message-ID: 20131202184751.GE4373@hermes.hilbert.loc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:24:18PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > > > > If there were databases or users with default_transaction_read_only
> > > > > set in the old cluster, the pg_dumpall run will cause that property
> > > > > to be set in the new cluster, so what you are saying seems to be
> > > > > that a cluster can't be upgraded to a new major release if any
> > > > > database within it has that set.
> > > >
> > > > That is *precisely* my use case which I initially asked about.
> > >
> > > The use-case would be that default_transaction_read_only is turned on in
> > > postgresql.conf
> >
> > Are you telling me which use case I initially asked
> > about on this thread ?
>
> No, this is another use-case that is fixed the pg_upgrade patch. The
> ALTER DATABASE SET is also fixed by this patch.

I see.

Thanks,
Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2013-12-02 19:45:01 Re: Trust intermediate CA for client certificates
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-12-02 18:44:43 Re: unnest on multi-dimensional arrays

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2013-12-02 18:51:28 Re: Draft release notes for 9.3.2
Previous Message Robert Haas 2013-12-02 18:30:42 Re: Extension Templates S03E11