Обсуждение: Error installing Postgres
When trying to upgrade Postgres I got this message: The existing data directory (Date/time settings: floating -point numbers) is not compatible with this server (Date/Time setting: 64-bit integers) I saw a few posts about this but I'm still not sure how to fix it. I think one of them said I need to completely remove Postgres and do a dump and restore. Is that the only way? Christine
On 22/04/2009 16:57, Christine Penner wrote: > The existing data directory (Date/time settings: floating -point > numbers) is not compatible with this server (Date/Time setting: 64-bit > integers) > > I saw a few posts about this but I'm still not sure how to fix it. I > think one of them said I need to completely remove Postgres and do a > dump and restore. Is that the only way? It sounds as if you're trying to get a later-version server to use an earlier-version data directory - this won't work. Between major versions of PostgreSQL (8.2 -> 8.3 for example) you *have* to do a dump/restore - it says this in the docs and (I think) in the release notes. Ray. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland rod@iol.ie Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals ------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 18:09 +0100, Raymond O'Donnell wrote: > On 22/04/2009 16:57, Christine Penner wrote: > > > The existing data directory (Date/time settings: floating -point > > numbers) is not compatible with this server (Date/Time setting: 64-bit > > integers) > > > > I saw a few posts about this but I'm still not sure how to fix it. I > > think one of them said I need to completely remove Postgres and do a > > dump and restore. Is that the only way? > > It sounds as if you're trying to get a later-version server to use an > earlier-version data directory - this won't work. Actually the error is about whether or not the server was compiled with integer datetime support. There may also be an upgrade error here as well if she is trying to use 8.4Beta because 8.4 finally fixes the long standing mistake of not using integer datetime support by default. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
I am upgrading from 8.3.4 to 8.3.7. That's why I'm confused. The notes said I wouldn't have to do that. 8.3.4 was the original install. Christine At 10:09 AM 22/04/2009, you wrote: >On 22/04/2009 16:57, Christine Penner wrote: > > > The existing data directory (Date/time settings: floating -point > > numbers) is not compatible with this server (Date/Time setting: 64-bit > > integers) > > > > I saw a few posts about this but I'm still not sure how to fix it. I > > think one of them said I need to completely remove Postgres and do a > > dump and restore. Is that the only way? > >It sounds as if you're trying to get a later-version server to use an >earlier-version data directory - this won't work. Between major versions >of PostgreSQL (8.2 -> 8.3 for example) you *have* to do a dump/restore - >it says this in the docs and (I think) in the release notes. > >Ray. > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland >rod@iol.ie >Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals >------------------------------------------------------------------ > >-- >Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) >To make changes to your subscription: >http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On 22/04/2009 18:12, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 18:09 +0100, Raymond O'Donnell wrote: >> It sounds as if you're trying to get a later-version server to use an >> earlier-version data directory - this won't work. > > Actually the error is about whether or not the server was compiled with > integer datetime support. There may also be an upgrade error here as > well if she is trying to use 8.4Beta because 8.4 finally fixes the long > standing mistake of not using integer datetime support by default. Ah - ok. I stand corrected. :-) Ray. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland rod@iol.ie Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals ------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 10:13 -0700, Christine Penner wrote: > I am upgrading from 8.3.4 to 8.3.7. That's why I'm confused. The > notes said I wouldn't have to do that. 8.3.4 was the original install. What OS are you running? How did you go about upgrading? Debian/Ubuntu will use --integer-datetimes by default. If the machine was once compiled from source you could see the problem. RedHat/Cent/Fedora has long used the incorrect default of floating based timestamps. If you downloaded the wrong package from pgsqlrpms then you could run into the error (pgsqlrpms has both --integer-datetimes and floating based packages (for compatibility). Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
Windows XP pro. I went to the postgres web site, downloads, clicked on the binary package and selected windows. It gave me a file called Postgresql-8.3.7-1-windows.exe When I run that I hit next for the postgres directory, then after hitting next for the data directory I get the error. I kept all defaults for directories because I want to keep my existing data etc. Christine At 10:24 AM 22/04/2009, you wrote: >On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 10:13 -0700, Christine Penner wrote: > > I am upgrading from 8.3.4 to 8.3.7. That's why I'm confused. The > > notes said I wouldn't have to do that. 8.3.4 was the original install. > >What OS are you running? How did you go about upgrading? > >Debian/Ubuntu will use --integer-datetimes by default. If the machine >was once compiled from source you could see the problem. > >RedHat/Cent/Fedora has long used the incorrect default of floating based >timestamps. If you downloaded the wrong package from pgsqlrpms then you >could run into the error (pgsqlrpms has both --integer-datetimes and >floating based packages (for compatibility). > >Joshua D. Drake > >-- >PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org > Consulting, Development, Support, Training > 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ > The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 > > >-- >Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) >To make changes to your subscription: >http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 10:31 -0700, Christine Penner wrote: > Windows XP pro. I went to the postgres web site, downloads, clicked > on the binary package and selected windows. It gave me a file called > Postgresql-8.3.7-1-windows.exe > > When I run that I hit next for the postgres directory, then after > hitting next for the data directory I get the error. I kept all > defaults for directories because I want to keep my existing data etc. Huh, I wonder when the windows package changed its defaults. O.k. so what I would do is this: 1. Uninstall 8.3.7 2. Reinstall 8.3.4 3. Take a backup 4. Uninstall 8.3.4 5. Reinstall 8.3.7 in a new location 6. Restore backup 7. Test/Verify 7a. If o.k. remove 8.3.4 location 7b. If not o.k. check back Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
Joshua D. Drake wrote on 22.04.2009 19:34: > Huh, I wonder when the windows package changed its defaults. Could it be that Christine initially installed the pginstaller version, and now downloaded the EnterpriseDB installer? And EnterpriseDB compiles with a different default setting? As far as I recall the .exe is the EnterpriseDB One-Click-Installer. The pginstaller always comes as a zip file Christine: what kind of installer did you use for the initial installation? Thomas
On 22/04/2009 19:00, Thomas Kellerer wrote: > Could it be that Christine initially installed the pginstaller version, > and now downloaded the EnterpriseDB installer? And EnterpriseDB compiles > with a different default setting? > > As far as I recall the .exe is the EnterpriseDB One-Click-Installer. The > pginstaller always comes as a zip file That's probably a fair guess - from memory, the pginstaller uses a different naming convention too. Ray. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland rod@iol.ie Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals ------------------------------------------------------------------
It was a zip file with an msi installer in it. I tried to find a similar one for the update but all I could find was the one click installer. Christine At 11:00 AM 22/04/2009, you wrote: >Joshua D. Drake wrote on 22.04.2009 19:34: >>Huh, I wonder when the windows package changed its defaults. > >Could it be that Christine initially installed the pginstaller >version, and now downloaded the EnterpriseDB installer? And >EnterpriseDB compiles with a different default setting? > >As far as I recall the .exe is the EnterpriseDB One-Click-Installer. >The pginstaller always comes as a zip file > >Christine: what kind of installer did you use for the initial installation? > >Thomas > > >-- >Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) >To make changes to your subscription: >http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Christine Penner <christine@ingenioussoftware.com> writes:
> Windows XP pro. I went to the postgres web site, downloads, clicked
> on the binary package and selected windows. It gave me a file called
> Postgresql-8.3.7-1-windows.exe
There are different people distributing Postgres-for-Windows with
different build options. You need to make sure you get upgrade
packages from the same place you got the original install, else you
will possibly hit this type of problem.
regards, tom lane
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> RedHat/Cent/Fedora has long used the incorrect default of floating based
> timestamps.
Josh, you're being extremely unhelpful by presenting the problem in
this narrow minded "correct" vs "incorrect" way.
I'm going to go on the record now that if Bruce gets pg_migrator
working for 8.4 (which he seems to think might still happen) it's
entirely possible that the Red Hat packages won't *ever* switch away
from FP timestamps; or at least not till the next upgrade cycle that
pg_migrator doesn't work for. It won't be worth the pain of forcing
a dump/reload just to change the representation of timestamps.
regards, tom lane
On 22/04/2009 19:05, Christine Penner wrote: > It was a zip file with an msi installer in it. I tried to find a similar > one for the update but all I could find was the one click installer. The initial installation sounds like it was the pgInstaller, so. It would be worth trying again with the same installer: http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows The pgInstaller is listed underneath the one-click installer. Ray. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland rod@iol.ie Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals ------------------------------------------------------------------
The link below takes me to the same place I got this installer I'm having problems with. I am pretty sure I got the original installer from the Postgres web site just like I just did. Christine At 11:14 AM 22/04/2009, you wrote: >On 22/04/2009 19:05, Christine Penner wrote: > > It was a zip file with an msi installer in it. I tried to find a similar > > one for the update but all I could find was the one click installer. > >The initial installation sounds like it was the pgInstaller, so. It >would be worth trying again with the same installer: > > http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows > >The pgInstaller is listed underneath the one-click installer. > >Ray. > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland >rod@iol.ie >Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals >------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote: > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes: > > RedHat/Cent/Fedora has long used the incorrect default of floating based > > timestamps. > > Josh, you're being extremely unhelpful by presenting the problem in > this narrow minded "correct" vs "incorrect" way. > > I'm going to go on the record now that if Bruce gets pg_migrator > working for 8.4 (which he seems to think might still happen) it's Yes, I can confirm I think pg_migrator will work for 8.3->8.4 upgrades; I start testing this week. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
On 22/04/2009 19:21, Christine Penner wrote: > The link below takes me to the same place I got this installer I'm > having problems with. I am pretty sure I got the original installer from Well, there are two installers listed there (at least, that's what I see): * One-click installer, on EnterpriseDB's site - postgresql-8.3.7-1-windows.exe * pgInstaller, at http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/binary/v8.3.7/win32/ - postgresql-8.3.7-1.zip. Ray. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland rod@iol.ie Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals ------------------------------------------------------------------
Looks like that's the one I got last time. They must have had that one list on the main download page when I did the original install. I wouldn't have looked in the ftp section. Also when I looked in the ftp section earlier today, I skipped the binary stuff because the one click installer I got was called a binary package. I think that will work for me. Thanks Christine At 11:27 AM 22/04/2009, you wrote: >On 22/04/2009 19:21, Christine Penner wrote: > > The link below takes me to the same place I got this installer I'm > > having problems with. I am pretty sure I got the original installer from > >Well, there are two installers listed there (at least, that's what I see): > >* One-click installer, on EnterpriseDB's site - >postgresql-8.3.7-1-windows.exe > >* pgInstaller, at http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/binary/v8.3.7/win32/ - >postgresql-8.3.7-1.zip. > >Ray. > > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland >rod@iol.ie >Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals >------------------------------------------------------------------
Raymond O'Donnell wrote on 22.04.2009 20:14: > On 22/04/2009 19:05, Christine Penner wrote: >> It was a zip file with an msi installer in it. I tried to find a similar >> one for the update but all I could find was the one click installer. > > The initial installation sounds like it was the pgInstaller, so. It > would be worth trying again with the same installer: > > http://www.postgresql.org/download/windows > > The pgInstaller is listed underneath the one-click installer. > I still wonder why the one-click installer is so much more prominent than the pginstaller. All people who downloaded PG because I recommended it, downloaded the one-click installer because that "was the one on the download page" Thomas
Bruce Momjian wrote on 22.04.2009 20:26: > Yes, I can confirm I think pg_migrator will work for 8.3->8.4 upgrades; > I start testing this week. > This is pretty good news, cool. Will there be Windows binaries for the pg_migrator once that 8.4 ships? Thomas
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 7:54 PM, Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater@gmx.net> wrote: > I still wonder why the one-click installer is so much more prominent than > the pginstaller. Because it was designed to remove many of the complexities of the MSI installer that most users don't need and many don't understand if they're new to PostgreSQL. And it's not 'much more prominent', it's just listed above. There's even a paragraph at the top of the page explaining the differences between the two and the target audience for each. The trick is to read the text, or if you must blindly click on the first link you'll get the most simple package :-). -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Thomas Kellerer wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote on 22.04.2009 20:26: > > Yes, I can confirm I think pg_migrator will work for 8.3->8.4 upgrades; > > I start testing this week. > > > This is pretty good news, cool. > > Will there be Windows binaries for the pg_migrator once that 8.4 ships? Uh, no idea on that one but I think we will know in the next few weeks. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +