-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 171
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fails with preceeding/existing migrations #83
Comments
Can you please provide output for |
Hello @dolezel , I am also getting the same error, but I got to know why we are getting this issue. Actually it was because of I dont have a migration file which is already executed on database. This scenario arises because we are using shared database for our local environment. We dont have a database locally. So one of team member created a migration & execcuted that on database but that migration file is not yet shared with the team(as merge request is not approved yet) So can you please let us know if can use any other option in node-pg-migrate to avoid this error. |
Using |
Yes, I agree on that. |
It has to be run with double dashes for parameters to be passed through npm: |
Woah sorry I lost track of this! Looks closed, and I haven't run into the issue again. Thanks for being attentive. |
|
Thanks for all the info! Are there any risks when running |
When creating a second migration and attempting to migrate up to add it, the task fails because the first migration was already run. It seems to be running (and failing) rather than skipping previously successful/complete migrations.
I tried with the
--no-check-order
option, but got the same results.I've got two migrations currently, one was created and run successfully a while ago. The second was created recently. When running the second, it sees the first and fails. Checking the
pgmigrate
database table does in fact show the first/initial migration there. Timestamps match.I was hesitant to file an issue because this seems like user-error, but searching StackOverflow and the web doesn't turn up similar findings. Am I doing something wrong, or is this a legit bug?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: