| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade libraries check |
| Date: | 2012-05-29 23:06:51 |
| Message-ID: | 6199.1338332811@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> Also, I think it needs to force the extension version to match the old
> cluster. Otherwise, we could be dealing with on-disk format changes, or
> other complexities.
Yeah, I was thinking we might want --binary-upgrade to specify a
particular extension version in CREATE EXTENSION instead of letting it
default. I have not really thought through the pros and cons of that,
but it seems plausible.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2012-05-29 23:36:24 | Re: Fake async rep target |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2012-05-29 22:54:59 | Re: Performance patch for Win32 |