Re: pg_upgrade missing

From: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Matthias Howell <Matthias(dot)Howell(at)voxco(dot)com>, PostgreSQL - Novice <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade missing
Date: 2012-06-07 00:40:42
Message-ID: 1339029642.25018.1.camel@lenovo01-laptop03.gunduz.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice

On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 16:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org> writes:
> > The message is simple: You need to keep 9.0 RPMs around, so that
> > pg_upgrade can run. Install them, too.
>
> You might want to think about adopting the packaging layout I'm using
> for Fedora: pg_upgrade and back-branch executables all wrapped into
> a separate subpackage. Prevents this type of mistake.

It is nice for Fedora, but PGDG RPMs have the parallel installation
capability, so those binaries would conflict with the previous version.

Still, I could push a "pg_upgrade_from_9.1_to_9.2" (or whatever) RPM,
that would require both 9.0 and 9.1 to be installed, and use your
scripts to upgrade 9.1 to 9.2 (or so)

Regards,
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Community: devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
http://www.gunduz.org Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz

In response to

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-06-07 13:50:04 Re: Buffer Management: Can dirty pages be written before transaction commits?
Previous Message Prima Chairunnanda 2012-06-07 00:35:17 Buffer Management: Can dirty pages be written before transaction commits?