From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gabriele Bulfon <gbulfon(at)sonicle(dot)com> |
Cc: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: problem with self built postgres 9.0.9 |
Date: | 2020-05-29 14:18:44 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYWR6_NrQN=OrjjVN-1V==P9UXoM34c17VaJqkuS6FALg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 7:08 AM Gabriele Bulfon <gbulfon(at)sonicle(dot)com> wrote:
> Amazing! Rebuilt without -O and it worked like a charm!
> Thanks, at the moment I need to stick to 9.0.9 on this machine to be able
> to reuse the same database files.
>
>
Just to be thorough. You can update to 9.0.23 (i.e., build against the tip
of the 9.0.x set of branches) and still use the same database files. For
all versions (starting with v10 the version has only two components, not
three) changing the final digit in the version is a code-only change.
There is no material difference to risk for building 9.0.23 against the
newer O/S and compiler, etc, than it is to build 9.0.9 against the newer
O/S and compiler, etc. You assumed basically maximum risk when you choose
to keep using version 9.0 and upgraded everything else around it to
versions that were possibly never tested against it - and if they were
tested it is more likely they were tested against 9.0.23 as it is years
more current.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-05-29 14:19:38 | Re: problem with self built postgres 9.0.9 |
Previous Message | Gabriele Bulfon | 2020-05-29 14:08:00 | Re: problem with self built postgres 9.0.9 |