Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-25 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie nov 25 17:05:09 -0300 2011: > OK, it turns out that exclusion contraints used in pre-9.2 regression > tests were deleted before the regression tests finished, which means > they were not tested by me. (This might be a good reason _not_ to have > the r

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > > On 24.11.2011 07:01, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > >> OK, that is a heap table. My only guess is that the heap is being > > > >> created without binary_upgrade_next_heap_pg_class_oid being set

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > On 24.11.2011 07:01, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > >> OK, that is a heap table. My only guess is that the heap is being > > >> created without binary_upgrade_next_heap_pg_class_oid being set. > > >> Looking at the code, I c

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 24.11.2011 07:01, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> OK, that is a heap table. My only guess is that the heap is being > >> created without binary_upgrade_next_heap_pg_class_oid being set. > >> Looking at the code, I can't see how the heap could be cr

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-24 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 24.11.2011 07:01, Bruce Momjian wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, that is a heap table. My only guess is that the heap is being created without binary_upgrade_next_heap_pg_class_oid being set. Looking at the code, I can't see how the heap could be created without this happening. Another idea

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: > OK, that is a heap table. My only guess is that the heap is being > created without binary_upgrade_next_heap_pg_class_oid being set. > Looking at the code, I can't see how the heap could be created without > this happening. Another idea is that pg_dumpall isn't output the p

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-22 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On tis, 2011-11-22 at 15:42 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > I thought these were fixed a while ago, but I'm still seeing these when > > > upgrading from master to self (using testing script sent in a while > > > ago). This is completely repr

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-22 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tis, 2011-11-22 at 15:42 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > I thought these were fixed a while ago, but I'm still seeing these when > > upgrading from master to self (using testing script sent in a while > > ago). This is completely reproducible. What's happening? > >

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-22 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I thought these were fixed a while ago, but I'm still seeing these when > upgrading from master to self (using testing script sent in a while > ago). This is completely reproducible. What's happening? > > ... > Restoring user relation files > /home/peter/devel/postgr

[HACKERS] pg_upgrade relation OID mismatches

2011-11-22 Thread Peter Eisentraut
I thought these were fixed a while ago, but I'm still seeing these when upgrading from master to self (using testing script sent in a while ago). This is completely reproducible. What's happening? ... Restoring user relation files /home/peter/devel/postgresql/git/postgresql/contrib/pg_upgra M