Re: pg_upgrade project status

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade project status
Date: 2009-01-28 11:54:47
Message-ID: 20090128115447.GX8123@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Zdenek Kotala (Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM) wrote:
> And very important thing is that you need old version of postgreSQL
> installed, which is something what packagers does not want. Look on
> Oracle how does it.

Just as a counter-point, Debian handles multiple concurrently installed
versions of PostgreSQL just fine, in large part to specifically deal
with the smooth migration challenge (though also because we realize
people may want to continue using the old version while others may want
to install the new version).

Not sure if that's something the community wants to encourage other
packagers to do or if we should look at making it easier to do, but it's
at least possible and has been done for a pretty large distribution.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2009-01-28 12:42:34 Re: Hot standby, recovery infra
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2009-01-28 11:30:36 Re: Index Scan cost expression