Re: Rewriting pg_upgrade

From: Doug McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>
To: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)libertyrms(dot)info>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Rewriting pg_upgrade
Date: 2003-09-29 23:35:18
Message-ID: m3smmfkw21.fsf@varsoon.wireboard.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)libertyrms(dot)info> writes:

> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian) writes:
> > Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> >> FWIW, FreeBSD just removed it (in the 5.x versions). Of course you can
> >> still easily install it from ports.
> >
> > Interesting. Why would they remove it?
>
> Because it's a REALLY BIG ball of mud to include as a core dependancy?

/agree

Also, it's quite probable that people installing/upgrading PG would
have anything from 5.003 onward. Knowing what programming constructs
you can use and still be compatible with older versions requires quite
a bit of scholarship.

I know that if I were upgrading PG on, say, a Red Hat 6.2 box and was
forced to upgrade Perl to 5.8.1 as a dependency I'd be swearing pretty
hard...

-Doug

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-09-29 23:54:32 Re: Is there any way to force analyze to run on a whole table?
Previous Message Lamar Owen 2003-09-29 23:26:40 Re: Where is libpq++ on redhat 9?