On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 02:44:05PM -0700, Lonni J Friedman wrote: >> Greetings, >> I'm in the process of planning for a production upgrade from 9.1.6 to >> 9.2.x (all Linux-x86-64). In my staging environment (which has the >> same versions), I kicked off pg_upgrade about 5 hours ago, and its >> still not done. It is making progress, so I don't think anything has >> gone wrong, beyond it taking much longer than anticipated. >> >> When I used pg_upgrade to go from 9.0.x to 9.1.x, it finished in just >> under an hour. There is admittedly about three times as much data (in >> terms of disk usage) now than when I upgraded from 9.0.x. Would that >> explain the increased time needed to do the upgrade? Or is there >> something about the upgrade to 9.2.x that requires a lot more time? >> >> I'm trying to understand if what I'm seeing is expected, normal >> behavior, or if something might not be right. > > Odd. How many object/tables do you have? I have just patched 9.2 to > improve upgrades for clusters with many objects. about 5000 tables spread across 5 databases. -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
