On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:22:47AM +0100, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > ERROR: transaction is read-only > > Now, this is quite understandable since one of the databases > is set to > > ALTER DATABASE ... SET DEFAULT_TRANSACTION_READ_ONLY TO ON; > > However, since the above setting is something which can > be expected every so often in any odd PostgreSQL cluster > (and not some weird coincidence no one really knows how > they got into in the first place) I would think pg_upgrade > really should be able to handle. > > Technically that's pretty easy - make sure transactions are > set to readwrite for the pg_upgrade run by any number of > means: > > - ALTER DATABASE before/after pg_upgrade > - ALTER USER running the pg_upgrade > - SET TRANSACTION READ WRITE at the appropriate times > - ... > > Or at least this limitation of pg_upgrade (requiring > DB write access) should get a mention in the docs and/or > man page. > > What is the informed opinion on this ? I think pg_upgrade did the right thing here by throwing an error. There is no clean way to handle these cases without possibly causing more problems. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
