Thread: A note on pg_upgrade and missing "pg_upgrade_support.so"
Hi Just a quick note for anyone else building 9.0 from source and experimenting with pg_upgrade - if you get a message like the following when running the pg_upgrade binary: pg_upgrade_support.so must be created and installed in /path/to/pg90/lib/postgresql/pg_upgrade_support.so you need to build the the separate "pg_upgrade_support" as well. Also, the current first hit on Google for "pg_upgrade" is this page: http://www.postgresql.org/files/documentation/books/aw_pgsql/node267.html which is hopelessly outdated (the "pg_upgrade" utility described appears to have been obsoleted 5 years or so ago, see: http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/contrib/pg_upgrade/Attic/pg_upgrade ) HTH Ian Barwick
Ian Barwick wrote:
> Hi
>
> Just a quick note for anyone else building 9.0 from source and experimenting
> with pg_upgrade - if you get a message like the following when running the
> pg_upgrade binary:
>
> pg_upgrade_support.so must be created and installed in
> /path/to/pg90/lib/postgresql/pg_upgrade_support.so
>
> you need to build the the separate "pg_upgrade_support" as well.
Well, that is step #4:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/pgupgrade.html
4.
Install pg_upgrade
Install pg_upgrade and pg_upgrade_support in the new PostgreSQL cluster
Was that not clear enough?
> Also, the current first hit on Google for "pg_upgrade" is this page:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/files/documentation/books/aw_pgsql/node267.html
>
> which is hopelessly outdated (the "pg_upgrade" utility described appears to
> have been obsoleted 5 years or so ago, see:
> http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/contrib/pg_upgrade/Attic/pg_upgrade
> )
Yes, that is all very old. I hope that will change now that 9.0 is
released.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Ian Barwick wrote: > > Hi > > > > Just a quick note for anyone else building 9.0 from source and experimenting > > with pg_upgrade - if you get a message like the following when running the > > pg_upgrade binary: > > > > pg_upgrade_support.so must be created and installed in > > /path/to/pg90/lib/postgresql/pg_upgrade_support.so > > > > you need to build the the separate "pg_upgrade_support" as well. > > Well, that is step #4: > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/pgupgrade.html > 4. > > Install pg_upgrade > > Install pg_upgrade and pg_upgrade_support in the new PostgreSQL cluster > > Was that not clear enough? I hope my comment didn't sound insulting. I really want to know how that doc item can be made clearer. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
2010/9/21 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>: > Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Ian Barwick wrote: >> > Hi >> > >> > Just a quick note for anyone else building 9.0 from source and experimenting >> > with pg_upgrade - if you get a message like the following when running the >> > pg_upgrade binary: >> > >> > pg_upgrade_support.so must be created and installed in >> > /path/to/pg90/lib/postgresql/pg_upgrade_support.so >> > >> > you need to build the the separate "pg_upgrade_support" as well. >> >> Well, that is step #4: >> >> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/pgupgrade.html >> 4. >> >> Install pg_upgrade >> >> Install pg_upgrade and pg_upgrade_support in the new PostgreSQL cluster >> >> Was that not clear enough? > > I hope my comment didn't sound insulting. I really want to know how > that doc item can be made clearer. No insult taken :) .With the benefit of hindsight it's plenty clear; the problem was: a) I was doing this in a hurry (had a small amount of time to kill and a dev machine with an older beta on it) b) got sidetracked by this thread which appears to describe the same problem: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-testers/2010-06/msg00000.php and which was popping up pretty high in Google. Looking over the doc page again, if scanning over it, it's a bit easy to misread it as something like "Install pg_upgrade for pg_upgrade support in the new PostgreSQL cluster". To my shame I hadn't even looked at pg_upgrade before, so was coming to it from a point of zero knowledge. How about a slightly more pedantic phrasing such as: ------ 4. Install pg_upgrade pg_upgrade requires the installation of the contrib modules "pg_upgrade" and "pg_upgrade_support" in the new PostgreSQL cluster ------ (maybe "pg_upgrade" and "pg_upgrade_support" could be highlighted in some way, e.g. with the courier-style font if that fits in with the doc functions). Anyway, it worked fine and I have since used it to upgrade to 9.0 on my personal "production" server with minimal downtime. Thanks for yet another great release Ian Barwick
Ian Barwick wrote: > >> Well, that is step #4: > >> > >> ? ? ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/pgupgrade.html > >> ? ? ? 4. > >> > >> ? ? ? Install pg_upgrade > >> > >> ? ? ? Install pg_upgrade and pg_upgrade_support in the new PostgreSQL cluster > >> > >> Was that not clear enough? > > > > I hope my comment didn't sound insulting. ?I really want to know how > > that doc item can be made clearer. > > No insult taken :) .With the benefit of hindsight it's plenty clear; > the problem was: > > a) I was doing this in a hurry (had a small amount of time to kill and > a dev machine with an older beta on it) > b) got sidetracked by this thread which appears to describe the same > problem: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-testers/2010-06/msg00000.php > and which was popping up pretty high in Google. Yep, we need to address this. > Looking over the doc page again, if scanning over it, it's a bit easy > to misread it as something like "Install pg_upgrade for pg_upgrade > support in the new PostgreSQL cluster". The big problem was that the title said "Install pg_upgrade", but the detail had you installing two things, one of which was pg_upgrade. It was using pg_upgrade in both a generic sense, and in the /contrib/pg_upgrade sense, which is bound to confuse, as you said. I have attached a doc diff I backpatched to 9.0 that includes pg_upgrade_support in the section title. This should avoid future confusing. Thanks for your report. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/pgupgrade.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/pgupgrade.sgml index 2a806b5..7bc939c 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/pgupgrade.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/pgupgrade.sgml @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ gmake prefix=/usr/local/pgsql.new install </step> <step> - <title>Install pg_upgrade</title> + <title>Install pg_upgrade and pg_upgrade_support</title> <para> Install <application>pg_upgrade</> and