From: Jerry Sievers <gsievers19@comcast.net>
To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>
Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>,
  "pgsql-general\@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>,
  "pgsql-admin\@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org>,
  "pgsql-performance\@lists.postgresql.org"
 <pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
References: 
 <DM5PR09MB15157D85EB291E8F7EA62E25B87F0@DM5PR09MB1515.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	<1a3ebd40-7870-3eab-97d4-ca2b9907d917@aklaver.com>
	<DM5PR09MB151597B492B84C4E7FC8E099B87F0@DM5PR09MB1515.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	<5f0d7335-e681-56bb-7d14-cf97fccb1bcf@aklaver.com>
	<DM5PR09MB15156F523C5E066175669CB1B87F0@DM5PR09MB1515.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	<4b66fd13-951c-fab6-a618-d27860ba465b@aklaver.com>
	<DM5PR09MB151575804C46BE5FCE21E5F3B87F0@DM5PR09MB1515.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 18:24:10 -0500
In-Reply-To: 
 <DM5PR09MB151575804C46BE5FCE21E5F3B87F0@DM5PR09MB1515.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
	(Murthy Nunna's message of "Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:49:32 +0000")
Message-ID: <871sdbzizp.fsf@jsievers.enova.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov> writes:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Port numbers are correct.
>
> I moved the position of -c (-p 5433 -P 5434 -c -r -v). Now it is NOT comp=
laining about old cluster running. However, I am running into a different p=
roblem.

I noted in your earlier message the final -c... the dash was not a
regular 7bit ascii char but some UTF or whatever dash char.

I wonder if that's what you fed your shell and it caused a silent
parsing issue, eg the -c dropped.

But of course email clients wrap and mangle text like that all sorts of
fun ways so lordy knows just what you originally sent :-)

FWIW


>
> New cluster database "ifb_prd_last" is not empty
> Failure, exiting
>
> Note: ifb_prd_last is not new cluster. It is actually old cluster.
>
> Is this possibly because in one of my earlier attempts where I
> shutdown old cluster and ran pg_upgrade with -c at the end of the
> command line. I think -c was ignored and my cluster has been upgraded
> in that attempt. Is that possible?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com]=20
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:35 PM
> To: Murthy Nunna <mnunna@fnal.gov>; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; p=
gsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_upgrade 10.2
>
> On 06/12/2018 02:18 PM, Murthy Nunna wrote:
>> pg_upgrade -V
>> pg_upgrade (PostgreSQL) 10.4
>>=20
>> pg_upgrade -b /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v9_3_14_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -B=20
>> /fnal/ups/prd/postgres/v10_4_x64/Linux-2-6/bin -d=20
>> /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last -D /data0/pgdata/ifb_prd_last_104 -p 5433=20
>> -P 5434 -r -v =E2=80=93c
>>=20
>>
>
> Looks good to me. The only thing that stands out is that in your original=
 post you had:
>
> -p 5432
>
> and above you have:
>
> -p 5433
>
> Not sure if that makes a difference.
>
> The only suggestion I have at the moment is to move -c from the end of th=
e line to somewhere earlier on the chance that there is a bug that is not f=
inding it when it's at the end.
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--=20
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800