Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem

2000-11-25 Thread Tom Lane
"Mitch Vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > DEBUG: Data Base System is starting up at Sun Nov 12 18:20:04 2000 > FATAL 2: Read("/usr/local/pgsql/data/pg_control") failed: 2 > FATAL 2: Read("/usr/local/pgsql/data/pg_control") failed: 2 > Startup failed - abort > The only compilation change I

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone? - Fixed!

2000-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
I said: > if (ControlFile->blcksz != BLCKSZ) > elog(STOP, "database was initialized with BLCKSZ %d,\n\tbut the backend was >compiled with BLCKSZ %d.\n\tlooks like you need to initdb.", ControlFile-> blcksz, BLCKSZ); > But I haven't stress-tested it. From your report, it sounds like

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone? - Fixed!

2000-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Mitch Vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It wasn't PostgreSQL, it was me of course! > Seeing as it was so long ago, I forgot that the BLCKSZ on the production > server wasn't 32k, it was 31k (for whatever reason).. When I set the BLCKSZ > lower than that and tried to start the backend it told

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone? - Fixed!

2000-11-12 Thread Mitch Vincent
, I'm off to sit in the corner for a while... -Mitch - Original Message - From: "Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mitch Vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyo

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone?

2000-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > I think I might have explained this wrong.. > > Ok, both databases had a BLCKSZ of 32k before the upgrade (in 7.0.2), one > database that I upgraded first to 7.0.3 went flawlessly, it started, I can > do every operation fine and it's BLCKSZ is 3

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone?

2000-11-12 Thread Mitch Vincent
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 6:34 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone? > Block size can not be changes without dump/reload. If you think it > worked once, you are wrong. Sorry.

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone?

2000-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Block size can not be changes without dump/reload. If you think it worked once, you are wrong. Sorry. The page headers have to be written at the start of every block. [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > I realize it's Sunday night and not many people will be checking their > e

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem - anyone?

2000-11-12 Thread Mitch Vincent
I realize it's Sunday night and not many people will be checking their email, however I must ask one final time before I take some drastic measures (erasing the data directory and initdb 'ing, then restoring the data from last night's backup, losing an entire day's worth of data) -- does anyone ha

Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem

2000-11-12 Thread Mitch Vincent
By the way, what is pg_control and what does it do? -Mitch - Original Message - From: "Michael Ansley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Mitch Vincent '" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 4:02 PM Subje

RE: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem

2000-11-12 Thread Michael Ansley
Title: RE: [HACKERS] 7.0.2 -> 7.0.3 problem You have to dump/initdb/reload if you change the block size.  Simply recompiling is not going to work. Cheers... MikeA -Original Message- From: Mitch Vincent To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11-13-00 12:57 AM Subject: [HACKERS] 7.