| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David F(dot) Skoll" <dfs(at)roaringpenguin(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: upgrade issue |
| Date: | 2003-05-23 17:49:33 |
| Message-ID: | 17268.1053712173@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
"David F. Skoll" <dfs(at)roaringpenguin(dot)com> writes:
> I have a customer who symlinked libpg.so.3 to libpg.so.2 and he hasn't
> reported problems.
> I don't really advocate this, but at the same time, it's a quick fix :-)
The binary-level incompatibility only affects clients that use NOTIFY,
so for most applications you should be able to get away with the above.
The real solution of course is not to remove libpg.so.2 when you
upgrade, if you are not upgrading everything that uses it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nam Nguyen | 2003-05-23 18:00:22 | unsubscribe |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-23 17:38:37 | Re: [ADMIN] Q: Structured index - which one runs faster? |