On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 03:42:25PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Edmund Horner <ejrh00@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 24 May 2012 12:33, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >> I have applied the attached patch which should fix the problem. How
> >> can we get Edmund a copy of a new binary for testing? Does he have to
> >> wait for beta2?
> >
> > My uneducated guess is that your patch will fix the problem.
> >
> > But I don't think I'm up to compiling it myself. If someone reputable
> > can send me a new pg_upgrade.exe binary I'm happy to run it.
>
> I've built a new one off git master + Bruce's patch. You can get it
> from http://www.hagander.net/tmp/pg_upgrade.zip - please see if that
> one works for you.
Thanks, but thinking more, I am more concerned. Here is what we think
is happening (ah, flashbacks to the PG Windows port):
pg_ctl start > file1
pg_dumpall > file1
pg_ctl stop > file1
generates a file share error for pg_dump. I have replaced that with:
pg_ctl start > file2
pg_dumpall > file1
pg_ctl stop > file2
I am now concerned that 'pg_ctl stop' is going to give us a share
violation. The fix will be to use 'file3' for pg_ctl stop. Can I get
an updated report to see if that is accurate? Thanks.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +