Bruce Momjian wrote:
> OK, so it fails for all tables and you are using the newest version.
> Thanks for all your work. I am now guessing that pg_upgrade 9.1.X is
> just broken on Windows.
>
> Perhaps the variables set by pg_upgrade_support.so are not being passed
> into the server variables? I know pg_upgrade 9.0.X worked on Windows
> because EnterpriseDB did extensive testing recently on this. Has
> anyone used pg_upgrade 9.1.X on Windows?
OK, I have a new theory. postmaster.c processes the -b
(binary-upgrade) flag by setting a C variable:
case 'b':
/* Undocumented flag used for binary upgrades */
IsBinaryUpgrade = true;
break;
I am now wondering if this variable is not being passed down to the
sessions during Win32's EXEC_BACKEND. Looking at the other postmaster
settings, these set GUC variables, which I assume are passed down. Can
someone confirm this? How should this be fixed?
FYI, the binary-upgrade set() functions will not operate unless the -b
option is enabled, which explains the failure the reporter is seeing.
--
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
