From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>
cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
        Robins Tharakan <tharakan@gmail.com>,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
        "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Fix pg_upgrade to preserve datdba (was: Re: pg_upgrade failing
 for 200+ million Large Objects)
In-reply-to: <0b5d506d-70d2-1506-bbdf-89e6453c0289@wi3ck.info>
References: <a9f9376f1c3343a6bb319dce294e20ac@EX13D05UWC001.ant.amazon.com>
 <CABUevEwyLb9VE0D+bAQtUnaA7bffXYzBpopYuh7kGTQxY9T5_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEP4nAw2WA1wyb9LG7BOEuN3Xr-xWiZZ0w_hKtpyvdUPKmcAJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1742698.1615221182@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CABUevEzvU07CqwGdaOmxNfDtrkY-xEcLjiN3GAmurowyCnbG7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1743618.1615222719@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <4fbf92f2-ec91-f4fa-a259-f0968e34f3d7@wi3ck.info>
 <0b5d506d-70d2-1506-bbdf-89e6453c0289@wi3ck.info>
Comments: In-reply-to Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>
	message dated "Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:50:46 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <384712.1616345832.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:57:12 -0400
Message-ID: <384713.1616345832@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/384713.1616345832%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info> writes:
> On 3/20/21 12:39 AM, Jan Wieck wrote:
>> On the way pg_upgrade also mangles the pg_database.datdba
>> (all databases are owned by postgres after an upgrade; will submit a
>> separate patch for that as I consider that a bug by itself).

> Patch attached.

Hmm, doesn't this lose all *other* database-level properties?

I think maybe what we have here is a bug in pg_restore, its
--create switch ought to be trying to update the database's
ownership.

			regards, tom lane