On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:18:04PM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/pgupgrade.html
>
> "Obviously, no one should be accessing the clusters during the upgrade.
> pg_upgrade defaults to running servers on port 50432 to avoid unintended
> client connections. You can use the same port number for both clusters when
> doing an upgrade because the old and new clusters will not be running at the
> same time. However, when checking an old running server, the old and new
> port numbers must be different."
>
> In your OP you do not show overriding pg_upgrade defaults for ports, so
> assuming the scripts are looking for the live ports and not the upgrade
> ports that should not be an issue.
Agreed. I have no idea what would cause this, and have never heard a
report like this before.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Just out of curiosity, have you you ANALYZE on you db after the upgrade but before doing a count compare?
--
Melvin Davidson
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.![]()
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
