| From: | Rich Shepard <rshepard(at)appl-ecosys(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 |
| Date: | 2007-01-29 23:38:57 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0701291537350.18414@salmo.appl-ecosys.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> At one point there was discussion about using changes to the first digit
> to indicate that a dump and restore was needed because of an on disk
> format change and that changes to the second digit would indicate that
> only catalog entries have changed and that an upgrade tool (that doesn't
> exist yet) could be used to make the changes with minimal downtime.
Bruno,
So, to migrate from -8.1.4 to -8.2.1 I don't need to dump and restore?
Thanks,
Rich
--
Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D. | The Environmental Permitting
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. | Accelerator(TM)
<http://www.appl-ecosys.com> Voice: 503-667-4517 Fax: 503-667-8863
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2007-01-29 23:47:46 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 |
| Previous Message | Chad Wagner | 2007-01-29 22:55:37 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2007-01-29 23:47:46 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-01-29 23:02:12 | Re: Predicted lifespan of different |