Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

If anyone hits this it is an issue with using the Geography type with a non 4326 SRID on a table and pg_upgrade. It should be fixed (the check dropped as it's something of a relic) in the next version of PostGIS. In the meantime you would have to patch it out yourself. ( https://github.com/postgi

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 5:47 am, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 9/2/19 5:52 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: > > >> It's still creating the schema elements when it fails, it hasn't > >> started linking yet > > > > Alright at least you still a working 9.6 cluster . > > > > Not sure where to go from here. Like yo

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/3/19 3:45 PM, James Sewell wrote: -- For binary upgrade, create an empty extension and insert objects into it DROP EXTENSION IF EXISTS tablefunc; SELECT pg_catalog.binary_upgrade_create_empty_extension('tablefunc', 'public', true, '1.0', NULL, NULL, ARRAY[]::pg_cata

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/2/19 5:52 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: It's still creating the schema elements when it fails, it hasn't started linking yet Alright at least you still a working 9.6 cluster . Not sure where to go from here. Like you I am not sure how it can CREATE EXTENSION and not actually follow through o

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/2/19 5:38 PM, James Sewell wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 10:34, Adrian Klaver > wrote: On 9/2/19 5:20 PM, James Sewell wrote: > >     What is the pg_upgrade command you are using? > > > pg_upgrade --link --username postgres

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 10:34, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 9/2/19 5:20 PM, James Sewell wrote: > > > > > What is the pg_upgrade command you are using? > > > > > > pg_upgrade --link --username postgres > > Where are you in being able to?: > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/pgupgrade.html > > 16.

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/2/19 5:20 PM, James Sewell wrote: What is the pg_upgrade command you are using? pg_upgrade --link --username postgres Where are you in being able to?: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/pgupgrade.html 16. Reverting to old cluster ... If the --link option was used, the data fil

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 07:55, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 9/2/19 2:45 PM, James Sewell wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 7:41 am, Adrian Klaver > > wrote: > > > > On 9/2/19 2:20 PM, James Sewell wrote: > > > > > > > > So this is a separate

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

> > > > > I am going to assume then that it has to do with this: > > "LINE 39: "location_pt" "public"."geography"(Point,4283), " > > > > What is the above pointing to? > > > > > > This needs the PostGIS types and tables to work - they don't exist as > > they were not created with CR

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/2/19 4:57 PM, James Sewell wrote: I am going to assume then that it has to do with this: "LINE 39:     "location_pt" "public"."geography"(Point,4283), " What is the above pointing to? This needs the PostGIS types and tables to work - they don't exist as they were not cr

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 7:41 am, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 9/2/19 2:20 PM, James Sewell wrote: > > > > > So this is a separate cluster from the one you used pg_upgrade on? > > > > > > In that case yes it was seperate > > > > > > > > In other words when doing pg_upgrade you could not get a w

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/2/19 2:45 PM, James Sewell wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 7:41 am, Adrian Klaver > wrote: On 9/2/19 2:20 PM, James Sewell wrote: > >     So this is a separate cluster from the one you used pg_upgrade on? > > > In that case

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/2/19 2:20 PM, James Sewell wrote: So this is a separate cluster from the one you used pg_upgrade on? In that case yes it was seperate In other words when doing pg_upgrade you could not get a working cluster, correct? Pg_upgrade does not complete - but as it hasn’t starte

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 7:15 am, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 9/2/19 2:04 PM, James Sewell wrote: > Please reply to list also. > Ccing list. > > > > > > On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 11:56 pm, Adrian Klaver > > wrote: > > > > On 9/1/19 9:03 PM, James Sewell wrote: > >

Re: Upgrade 96 -> 11

On 9/1/19 9:03 PM, James Sewell wrote: Hi, I'm in the process of upgrading from 96 -> 11 (on RHEL 7.3) . Both the versions have PostGIS 2.5.1 installed and working. pg_upgrade fails with: pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error from TOC entry 440; 1259 537086 TABLE tablename databasename pg_resto

Upgrade 96 -> 11

Hi, I'm in the process of upgrading from 96 -> 11 (on RHEL 7.3) . Both the versions have PostGIS 2.5.1 installed and working. pg_upgrade fails with: pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error from TOC entry 440; 1259 537086 TABLE tablename databasename pg_restore: [archiver (db)] could not execute query: