Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Fri, Dec  7, 2012 at 04:21:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>>> Doesn't the check need to be at least indisvalid && indisready? Given
>>> that 9.2 represents !indislive as indisvalid && !indisready?

>> Um, good point.  It's annoying that we had to do it like that ...

> So, does this affect pg_upgrade?  Which PG versions?

I think you can just insist on indisvalid and indisready both being
true.  That's okay in all releases back to 8.3.

			regards, tom lane