Re: Upgrade to Red Hat Linux 9 broke PostgreSQL

From: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
To: Network Administrator <netadmin(at)vcsn(dot)com>
Cc: Guy Fraser <guy(at)incentre(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Upgrade to Red Hat Linux 9 broke PostgreSQL
Date: 2003-04-15 20:31:18
Message-ID: 200304151631.19001.lamar.owen@wgcr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Tuesday 15 April 2003 16:03, Network Administrator wrote:
> Quoting Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>:
> > that matter)) upgrade path -- virtually all other daemons are capable of
> > reading the old configs and data files or there is some form of data
> > migration tool packaged that does not require the old version to use.

> Ahhhh, ok. I see what you're saying. I guess the way I look at that is
> that you have the OS and then you have the stuff that runs on the OS.

PostgreSQL, as packaged i Red Hat Linux (since version 5.0) is considered part
of the OS. For Red Hat. YMMV, YOMV, etc.

> Ok, I what you're saying here. I must have mis-read the original email
> 'cause I thought this a PostgreSQL upgrade not a migration from MySQL

No, I was using the MySQL upgrade process as a contrasting example to the way
we do it. The upgrade in question was PostgreSQL to PostgreSQL of different
major versions.

For a from-source Linux distribution with interesting dependency resolution,
check out Gentoo. You build your entire dist from source.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Medi Montaseri 2003-04-15 20:48:15 Re: Postgres Compare
Previous Message Neil Conway 2003-04-15 20:27:07 Re: Are we losing momentum?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-04-15 20:36:52 Re: More thoughts about FE/BE protocol
Previous Message Neil Conway 2003-04-15 20:27:07 Re: Are we losing momentum?