On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 22:06 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I just performed a test upgrade from 9.1 to 9.2, and used
> > --new-port variable. However, the analyze_new_cluster.sh does not
> > include the new port, thus when I run it, it fails. Any chance to
> > add the port number to the script?
> Well, the reason people normally use the port number is to do a live
> check, but obviously when the script is created it isn't doing a
> check. I am worried that if I do embed the port number in there, then
> if they change the port after the upgrade, they now can't use the
> script. I assume users would have PGPORT set before running the
> script, no?
They can't use the script in each way -- at least we can make it usable
for one case, I think.
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
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Michael Paquier||Date: 2012-10-03 20:12:58|
|Subject: Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY|
|Previous:||From: Daniel Farina||Date: 2012-10-03 19:42:37|
|Subject: Re: Hash id in pg_stat_statements|