Re: [HACKERS] postgresql-7.4RC1 - unrecognized privilege type

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, bvctravel(at)yahoo(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postgresql-7.4RC1 - unrecognized privilege type
Date: 2003-11-09 02:16:25
Message-ID: 29953.1068344185@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> I agree, and this brings up a question that I've pondered before. Why do
> we ever *require* and initdb when only metadata has changed (i.e. the
> contents of the system catalogs, not catalog or page structure)?

In some cases we have to do it because there is a backend code change
that's dependent on the metadata change; that is, the backend will not
function correctly if you haven't fixed the catalog contents. The
reverse direction (old backend, new catalogs) is also dangerous. The
point of having a catalog version number is to ensure that the backend
and catalogs are in sync.

It's possible that we could devise some upgrade procedure that gets from
old backend/old catalogs to new backend/new catalogs without an initdb,
but I tend to think that this is basically the problem pg_upgrade is
supposed to solve. I'm not eager to spend time on a "pg_simple_upgrade"
procedure.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-11-09 02:28:16 Re: Autocomplete <TAB> on Postgres7.4beta5 not working?
Previous Message Joe Conway 2003-11-09 01:56:35 Re: [HACKERS] postgresql-7.4RC1 - unrecognized privilege type

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kurt Roeckx 2003-11-09 02:24:00 Re: Call for port reports
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-11-09 02:02:46 Re: Call for port reports