Bruce Momjian wrote:
After a quick chat with Bruce it was determined that we don't freeze
anything (it would be horrid for downtime if we did so in pg_migrator;
and it would be useless if ran anywhere else). What we do is migrate
pg_clog from the old cluster to the new. So never mind
Jamie Fox wrote:
Here's what I have found that got broken during pg_migrate: In two side
by
side databases (an 8.3.7 copy and 8.4.0 migrated with pg_migrator) the
pg_largeobject table has the same number of rows. However, in the 8.4
database any select for an loid in pg_largeobject
Jamie Fox wrote:
Hi -
REINDEX INDEX pg_largeobject_loid_pn_index;
This seems to have fixed the problem, lo_open of lob data is working again -
now to see how vacuumlo likes it.
So did it work?
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL
Worked great, vacuumlo finished, a vacuum -full finished amazingly quickly,
very exciting. We're pointing qa apps at it now for testing.
For some reason though, that index has to be rebuilt after running
pg_migrator.
I'll be testing on our 100GB+ prod copy shortly and will let you know if you
Jamie Fox wrote:
Here's what I have found that got broken during pg_migrate: In two side by
side databases (an 8.3.7 copy and 8.4.0 migrated with pg_migrator) the
pg_largeobject table has the same number of rows. However, in the 8.4
database any select for an loid in pg_largeobject returns
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jamie Fox wrote:
I can also see that the pg_largeobject table is different, in the
pg_restore
version the
Here's what I have found that got broken during pg_migrate: In two side
by
side databases (an 8.3.7 copy and 8.4.0 migrated with pg_migrator) the
pg_largeobject table has the same number of rows. However, in the 8.4
database any select for an loid in pg_largeobject returns zero rows.
Jamie Fox wrote:
Hi -
After what seemed to be a normal successful pg_migrator migration from 8.3.7
to 8.4.0, in either link or copy mode, vacuumlo fails on both our production
and qa databases:
Jul 1 11:17:03 db2 postgres[9321]: [14-1] LOG: duration: 175.563 ms
statement: DELETE FROM
Forwarded to hackers.
---
Jamie Fox wrote:
Hi -
This is probably more helpful - the pg_largeobject table only changed after
vacuumlo, not before. When comparing pre- and post- pg_migrator databases
(no vacuum or
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jamie Fox wrote:
I can also see that the pg_largeobject table is different, in the pg_restore
version the Rows (estimated) is 316286 and Rows (counted) is the same, in
the pg_migrator version the Rows (counted) is only 180507.
Wow, I didn't test large objects
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jamie Fox wrote:
I can also see that the pg_largeobject table is different, in the
pg_restore
version the Rows (estimated) is 316286 and Rows (counted) is the same, in
the pg_migrator version the Rows (counted) is only 180507.
Wow, I
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jamie Fox wrote:
I can also see that the pg_largeobject table is different, in the
pg_restore
version the Rows (estimated) is 316286 and Rows (counted) is the same,
in
the pg_migrator version the Rows
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jamie Fox wrote:
I can also see that the pg_largeobject table is different, in the
pg_restore
version the Rows (estimated) is 316286 and Rows (counted) is the
same, in
the
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jamie Fox wrote:
I can also see that the pg_largeobject table is different, in the
pg_restore
version the Rows (estimated) is 316286 and Rows (counted) is the
same, in
the
14 matches
Mail list logo
