Re: Upgrade issue (again).

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Upgrade issue (again).
Date: 2001-05-17 16:59:39
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.33.0105171358280.3057-100000@mobile.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 17 May 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wednesday 16 May 2001 19:05, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 May 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
> > > I am loathe to even bring this up, but with two messages today about it,
> > > I am going to be short and sweet:
>
> > > We don't have a reasonable upgrade path. ASCII dump->install
> > > new->initdb->restore is not a reasonable upgrade. Furthermore, the
> > > dump/restore cycle is a
> > > pain in the neck when tables get larger than a few hundred megabytes.
>
> > Personally ... I just upgraded 13 gig worth of databases using
> > dump/restore, didn't have to end a single file, in less then 1.5hrs from
> > start to finish ... *shrug*
>
> And 1.5 hours of downtime wasn't a problem? *raised eyebrow* :-) Or
> did you migrate to a different box running the new version? Or were
> you running more than one version on the one box? Some don't have
> that choice as easy, nor are they as experienced as you and I. Nor do
> they desire that much downtime.

Wasn't a problem ... I pre-warned all our clients, some of which make such
heavy use of the DB that we have to run vacuum on it every few hours, and,
to them, the benefits outweigh'd the brief bit of downtime ... *shrug*

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut - PostgreSQL 2001-05-17 17:44:19 pgsql/ oc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml rc/backend/uti ...
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2001-05-17 16:43:49 Re: Upgrade issue (again).