Re: update to 16.2

From: Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: update to 16.2
Date: 2024-03-08 14:03:27
Message-ID: CANzqJaAUxkDSktfud-U-sec+9r8N92_iFWtKrYpgzkOPgnNpeg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 5:01 AM Matthias Apitz <guru(at)unixarea(dot)de> wrote:

> El día viernes, marzo 08, 2024 a las 12:56:16 -0800, Christophe Pettus
> escribió:
>
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 8, 2024, at 00:53, Matthias Apitz <guru(at)unixarea(dot)de> wrote:
> > > It does not say definitely that for all other versions a dump/restore
> is
> > > required.
> >
> > You cannot just replace the binaries to upgrade from an earlier major
> version to 16.X. The release notes use "a dump/restore (is/is not)
> required" to indicated whether you can just replace the binaries ("is not")
> and restart the server on the same database files.
> >
>
> I know we can't just switch the binaries and restart the server. We're
> compiling the PostgreSQL software by our own (even with some small
> changes in the C-code) and deliver the full tree as
>
> /usr/local/sisis-pap/pgsql-11.1
> /usr/local/sisis-pap/pgsql-14.1
> /usr/local/sisis-pap/pgsql-15.1
> ...
>
> Also the migration path for customers is described and based on
> pg_dumpall, setup a new cluster fromm the above new version and load the
> dump with the new psql command into. The other option (pg_upgrade) we
> never used.
>

Upgrading onto a new Linux server (try logical replication or pg_dump -Fd
--jobs=), or staying on the old server (pg_upgrade)?

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2024-03-08 14:09:28 Re: update to 16.2
Previous Message Matthias Apitz 2024-03-08 10:00:52 Re: update to 16.2