From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Trond Eivind Glomsrød <teg(at)redhat(dot)com>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?) |
Date: | 2000-10-31 09:46:39 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0010302151540.777-100000@peter.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports |
Lamar Owen writes:
> In the environment of the general purpose OS upgrade, the RPM's
> installation scripts cannot fire up a backend, nor can it assume one
> is running or is not running, nor can the RPM installation scripts
> fathom from the run-time environment whether they are being run from a
> command line or from the OS upgrade (except on Linux Mandrake, which
> allows such usage).
I don't understand why this is so. It seems perfectly possible that some
%preremovebeforeupdate starts a postmaster, runs pg_dumpall, saves the
file somewhere, then the %postinstallafterupdate runs the inverse
operation. Disk space is not a valid objection, you'll never get away
without 2x storage. Security is not a problem either. Are you not
upgrading in proper dependency order or what? Everybody does dump,
remove, install, undump; so can the RPMs.
Okay, so it's not as great as a new KDE starting up and asking "may I
update your configuration files?", but understand that the storage format
is optimized for performance, not easy processing by external tools or
something like that.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martin Tomes | 2000-10-31 10:29:13 | Re: Postgres not finding tables |
Previous Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2000-10-31 07:17:50 | how to get rid of "NOTICE"'s in psql? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-10-31 09:51:04 | Re: LIMIT in DECLARE CURSOR: request for comments |
Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2000-10-31 07:51:59 | AW: regression failure/UnixWare7.1.1/current sources |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christos Poulkas | 2000-10-31 14:51:29 | Postgres on Windows NT |
Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2000-10-30 15:43:14 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?) |