Prev: [HACKERS] tsvector pg_stats seems quite a bit off.
Next: Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app
From: Bruce Momjian on 24 May 2010 15:41
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> wrote:
> > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> >> > I have updated the paragraph to be:
> >> >
> >> > ? ? Upgrading from PostgreSQL 8.3 has additional restrictions not present
> >> > ? ? when upgrading from later PostgreSQL releases. ?For example,
> >> > ? ? pg_upgrade will not work for a migration from 8.3 if a user column
> >> > ? ? is defined as:
> >> >
> >> > Can you suggest other wording?
> >>
> >> hmm that seems better thanks, however I just noticed that we don't have
> >> a "general limitations" section. The way the docs are now done suggests
> >> that there are not limitations at all (except for the two warnings in
> >> the migration guide). Is pg_upgrade really up to the point where it can
> >> fully replace pg_dump & pg_restore independent of the loaded (contrib)
> >> or even third party modules(like postgis or custom datatypes etc)?
> >
> > Yea, that's about right. ?I can add limiations if you want. ?;-)
>
> I don't believe this. For one thing, I am pretty sure that if there
> are ABI differences between loadable modules between the old and new
> cluster, hilarity will ensue.

Well, the point is that our existing code doesn't have any
incompatibilites that I know of. We could certainly add some in 9.1.

> > The only open pg_upgrade items are the ones on our TODO list:
> >
> > ? ? ? ?http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo
> >
> > (I can't give you a URL hash-reference to the section because it doesn't
> > work on Firefox and no one seems to be able to fix it.)
>
> It works OK for me. The link to /contrib/pg_upgrade within the nav
> section at the top righthand corner of the page seems to work just
> fine.
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#.2Fcontrib.2Fpg_upgrade

The problem is that the "Contents" menu on the top right of the page
doesn't allow a clickable link to that section, and many others.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Robert Haas on 24 May 2010 17:20
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> wrote:
>> > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> >> > I have updated the paragraph to be:
>> >> >
>> >> > ? ? Upgrading from PostgreSQL 8.3 has additional restrictions not present
>> >> > ? ? when upgrading from later PostgreSQL releases. ?For example,
>> >> > ? ? pg_upgrade will not work for a migration from 8.3 if a user column
>> >> > ? ? is defined as:
>> >> >
>> >> > Can you suggest other wording?
>> >>
>> >> hmm that seems better thanks, however I just noticed that we don't have
>> >> a "general limitations" section. The way the docs are now done suggests
>> >> that there are not limitations at all (except for the two warnings in
>> >> the migration guide). Is pg_upgrade really up to the point where it can
>> >> fully replace pg_dump & pg_restore independent of the loaded (contrib)
>> >> or even third party modules(like postgis or custom datatypes etc)?
>> >
>> > Yea, that's about right. ?I can add limiations if you want. ?;-)
>>
>> I don't believe this.  For one thing, I am pretty sure that if there
>> are ABI differences between loadable modules between the old and new
>> cluster, hilarity will ensue.
>
> Well, the point is that our existing code doesn't have any
> incompatibilites that I know of.  We could certainly add some in 9.1.

Yes, or third-party vendors could add some for us. We can't guarantee
this in general.

>> > The only open pg_upgrade items are the ones on our TODO list:
>> >
>> > ? ? ? ?http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo
>> >
>> > (I can't give you a URL hash-reference to the section because it doesn't
>> > work on Firefox and no one seems to be able to fix it.)
>>
>> It works OK for me.  The link to /contrib/pg_upgrade within the nav
>> section at the top righthand corner of the page seems to work just
>> fine.
>>
>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#.2Fcontrib.2Fpg_upgrade
>
> The problem is that the "Contents" menu on the top right of the page
> doesn't allow a clickable link to that section, and many others.

It does for me...

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Dave Page on 24 May 2010 17:38
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>>> It works OK for me.  The link to /contrib/pg_upgrade within the nav
>>> section at the top righthand corner of the page seems to work just
>>> fine.
>>>
>>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#.2Fcontrib.2Fpg_upgrade
>>
>> The problem is that the "Contents" menu on the top right of the page
>> doesn't allow a clickable link to that section, and many others.
>
> It does for me...

Doesn't here. FYI, neither do others such as 2.6, 2.7, 6.1 & 6.11


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Bruce Momjian on 24 May 2010 17:50
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> wrote:
> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> wrote:
> >> > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> >> >> > I have updated the paragraph to be:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ? ? Upgrading from PostgreSQL 8.3 has additional restrictions not present
> >> >> > ? ? when upgrading from later PostgreSQL releases. ?For example,
> >> >> > ? ? pg_upgrade will not work for a migration from 8.3 if a user column
> >> >> > ? ? is defined as:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Can you suggest other wording?
> >> >>
> >> >> hmm that seems better thanks, however I just noticed that we don't have
> >> >> a "general limitations" section. The way the docs are now done suggests
> >> >> that there are not limitations at all (except for the two warnings in
> >> >> the migration guide). Is pg_upgrade really up to the point where it can
> >> >> fully replace pg_dump & pg_restore independent of the loaded (contrib)
> >> >> or even third party modules(like postgis or custom datatypes etc)?
> >> >
> >> > Yea, that's about right. ?I can add limiations if you want. ?;-)
> >>
> >> I don't believe this. ?For one thing, I am pretty sure that if there
> >> are ABI differences between loadable modules between the old and new
> >> cluster, hilarity will ensue.
> >
> > Well, the point is that our existing code doesn't have any
> > incompatibilites that I know of. ?We could certainly add some in 9.1.
>
> Yes, or third-party vendors could add some for us. We can't guarantee
> this in general.

What is your point?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Robert Haas on 24 May 2010 18:28
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Dave Page <dpage(a)pgadmin.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> It works OK for me.  The link to /contrib/pg_upgrade within the nav
>>>> section at the top righthand corner of the page seems to work just
>>>> fine.
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#.2Fcontrib.2Fpg_upgrade
>>>
>>> The problem is that the "Contents" menu on the top right of the page
>>> doesn't allow a clickable link to that section, and many others.
>>
>> It does for me...
>
> Doesn't here. FYI, neither do others such as 2.6, 2.7, 6.1 & 6.11

Oh, interesting. 2.6 and 2.7 don't work for me, but 6.1 and 6.11 do.
That is really odd.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: [HACKERS] tsvector pg_stats seems quite a bit off.
Next: Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app