nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

After upgrade 7.8.0 to 7.9.0 JIRA fail to start Could not find a field-type definition with name "po

Computing @ ARGANS

JIRA 7.8.0 was working fine on our server but after upgrading to version 7.9.0 it failed to start with the fatal error Could not find a field-type definition with name "postgres95"

psotgresql 9.5 is running

dbconfig.xml from the upgrade is identical with the old version and includes the line:

<database-type>postgres95</database-type>

Google search does not return any specific hits.

Anyone experienced this problem?

Accepted answers

Andy Heinzer

You don't need to update the <database-type> value in the dbconfig.xml when you upgrade your database. I could understand why you might have adjusted this, but in fact Jira is expecting all postgres databases to have a value in this field of just

<database-type>postgres72</database-type>

regardless of the actual version of postgres you might be running. As such, I would recommend changing this back in your dbconfig.xml, save that file, and then restart Jira for these settings to take effect.

If in any doubt, please review the Connecting Jira to Postgresql for Jira 7.9. This document contains a sample dbconfig file that can help serve as a template for how this file should be laid out.

All comments

Andy Heinzer

<database-type>postgres72</database-type>

If in any doubt, please review the Connecting Jira to Postgresql for Jira 7.9. This document contains a sample dbconfig file that can help serve as a template for how this file should be laid out.

Computing @ ARGANS

Thank you Andrew this solved the problem.

It is however odd that JIRA was running perfectly with postgres95 in the dbconfig.xml from when I migrated to a new server a couple of months ago until when I upgraded to version 7.9 this morning.

Andy Heinzer

Really? That is strange. I believe Jira is using that tag to help define the correct field/table entities to use when creating tables and relations between these tables. So perhaps you might have changed this after Jira had already created these tables, and in turn it wasn't a problem because new tables weren't being created for an existing database.

But even if it worked then, we wouldn't recommend it. The process of upgrades or database migrations will certainly require the need of new tables to be made in the database to work properly.