From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | KGA Official <kga(dot)official(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Venkata B Nagothi <nag1010(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: We have a requirement to downgrade from PostgreSQL 9.5.4 to 9.5.2 |
Date: | 2016-09-20 06:51:42 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqR1DtZrJO39L+9YjuA+M7RBQsROgjwZB-1CNxgEa_+ndw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:21 PM, KGA Official <kga(dot)official(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Regarding "are you really going to downgrade again"?
> The upgraded postgres will be bundled along with product code changes and
> other products. So, if someone finds product issues, they will roll back
> everything together.
> So, essentially, yes. One requirement of the roll out is that it be possible
> to roll-back.
Roll-out can be a complicated requirement knowing that sometimes minor
releases can introduce new GUC parameters and those can generate WAL
records. Though it is a rare fact, it is not impossible, and things
are kept compatible as much as possible. Personally I find deploying a
backup of PGDATA instead of reusing an existing PGDATA with older
binaries after it has run with newer binaries a more iron-solid
approach, and I've learnt to be careful with such things..
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PHANIKUMAR G | 2016-09-20 08:27:54 | postgres failed to start from services manager on windows 2008 r2 |
Previous Message | KGA Official | 2016-09-20 06:21:38 | Re: We have a requirement to downgrade from PostgreSQL 9.5.4 to 9.5.2 |