pg.ddx.io pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedGeneral migration question
5+ messages / 4 participants
[nested] [flat]
* General migration question
@ 2010-08-31 13:04 Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:07 ` Re: General migration question Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Greg Spiegelberg @ 2010-08-31 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented here.
Will there ever be a release where a dump-restore is not necessary?
Perhaps, at least, minor releases (e.g. 9.0 to 9.1) will not require a
dump-restore?
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: General migration question
2010-08-31 13:04 General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
@ 2010-08-31 15:07 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2010-08-31 15:33 ` Re: General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2010-08-31 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
Excerpts from Greg Spiegelberg's message of mar ago 31 09:04:18 -0400 2010:
> Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented here.
> Will there ever be a release where a dump-restore is not necessary?
> Perhaps, at least, minor releases (e.g. 9.0 to 9.1) will not require a
> dump-restore?
9.0 to 9.1 is not a minor release. 9.0.0 to 9.0.1 is a minor release,
and this doesn't require a dump/reload, but it also doesn't have any new
features. 9.0 to 9.1 is just as major as 8.4 to 9.0 is. (The rule is:
a change in second digit is major release, a change in first digit is
marketing pressure)
You can upgrade in place using pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.0 (thus you
don't need dump/reload). In general, it will be possible to migrate
from one major version to the next with pg_upgrade starting with the
8.4-to-9.0 jump.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: General migration question
2010-08-31 13:04 General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:07 ` Re: General migration question Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
@ 2010-08-31 15:33 ` Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:42 ` Re: General migration question Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Greg Spiegelberg @ 2010-08-31 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Greg Spiegelberg's message of mar ago 31 09:04:18 -0400 2010:
>> Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented here.
>> Will there ever be a release where a dump-restore is not necessary?
>> Perhaps, at least, minor releases (e.g. 9.0 to 9.1) will not require a
>> dump-restore?
>
> 9.0 to 9.1 is not a minor release. 9.0.0 to 9.0.1 is a minor release,
> and this doesn't require a dump/reload, but it also doesn't have any new
> features. 9.0 to 9.1 is just as major as 8.4 to 9.0 is. (The rule is:
> a change in second digit is major release, a change in first digit is
> marketing pressure)
Okay, wrong terminology. I meant minor release as in Major.Minor.Maintenance.
> You can upgrade in place using pg_upgrade from 8.4 to 9.0 (thus you
> don't need dump/reload). In general, it will be possible to migrate
> from one major version to the next with pg_upgrade starting with the
> 8.4-to-9.0 jump.
I knew of the pg_upgrade but it's the "in general" part that still
makes it a possible bad pill to swallow.
All I'm suggesting is lumping those things requiring a dump/restore
together for major updates.
Greg
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: General migration question
2010-08-31 13:04 General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:07 ` Re: General migration question Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2010-08-31 15:33 ` Re: General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
@ 2010-08-31 15:42 ` Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:57 ` Re: General migration question Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Scott Marlowe @ 2010-08-31 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>; +Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>; pgsql-admin
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Greg Spiegelberg
<gspiegelberg@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Greg Spiegelberg's message of mar ago 31 09:04:18 -0400 2010:
>>> Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented here.
>>> Will there ever be a release where a dump-restore is not necessary?
>>> Perhaps, at least, minor releases (e.g. 9.0 to 9.1) will not require a
>>> dump-restore?
>>
>> 9.0 to 9.1 is not a minor release. 9.0.0 to 9.0.1 is a minor release,
>> and this doesn't require a dump/reload, but it also doesn't have any new
>> features. 9.0 to 9.1 is just as major as 8.4 to 9.0 is. (The rule is:
>> a change in second digit is major release, a change in first digit is
>> marketing pressure)
>
> Okay, wrong terminology. I meant minor release as in Major.Minor.Maintenance.
But you do understand that in pgsql, it's major.major.minor right?
> All I'm suggesting is lumping those things requiring a dump/restore
> together for major updates.
That's exactly what does happen, if you remember that pgsql is
numbered major.major.minor.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: General migration question
2010-08-31 13:04 General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:07 ` Re: General migration question Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2010-08-31 15:33 ` Re: General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:42 ` Re: General migration question Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
@ 2010-08-31 15:57 ` Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2010-08-31 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>; +Cc: Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>; Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>; pgsql-admin
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 09:42 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > All I'm suggesting is lumping those things requiring a dump/restore
> > together for major updates.
>
> That's exactly what does happen, if you remember that pgsql is
> numbered major.major.minor.
Perhaps thinking about it like this will help:
(major.major).(minor|maintenance)
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-08-31 15:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-08-31 13:04 General migration question Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:07 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2010-08-31 15:33 ` Greg Spiegelberg <gspiegelberg@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:42 ` Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
2010-08-31 15:57 ` Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox