public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedRe: Automatic compat checking? (was 7.4 compatibility question)
3+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Re: Automatic compat checking? (was 7.4 compatibility question)
@ 1970-01-01 00:00 Christoph Haller <[email protected]>
parent: Richard Huxton <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Haller @ 1970-01-01 00:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Huxton <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]
>
> On Wednesday 22 October 2003 07:37, Neil Conway wrote:
> > The second audience is the people who are really interested in exactly
> > what has changed between the new release of PostgreSQL and the previous
> > release series. It is important that we make it easy for an admin
> > planning a PostgreSQL upgrade at a fairly large site to be able to see
> > what changes in PostgreSQL have been made, and what changes will be
> > necessary in their own applications.
>
> Something I was pondering the other day was whether a pg_compat_chk utility
> would be practical/desirable. You run it against your existing database /
> schema dump and it prints a set of warnings:
>
> Old version = 7.2.1
> New version = 7.4.0
>
> Warning: schema support introduced (v7.3)
> all objects will be placed in the default schema
> Failure: DEFAULT 'now' not supported (v7.4)
> table1.column2
> table2.column3
> Notice: timestamp now holds milliseconds by default (v7.3)
> tableX.whatever
>
> My main concern would be that a 90% solution might be worse than nothing at
> all.
> Incidentally, this is not idle speculation, but something I might well have
> time to stick in gborg during the 7.5 devt cycle.
>
> --
> Richard Huxton
> Archonet Ltd
>
A pg_compat_chk utility sounds great.
No idea, if this is practical, but it's desirable - at least to me.
Regards, Christoph
PS I'm surprised no one else replied.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
* Automatic compat checking? (was 7.4 compatibility question)
@ 2003-10-22 09:30 Richard Huxton <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Richard Huxton @ 2003-10-22 09:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Neil Conway <[email protected]>; Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>; +Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <[email protected]>; Tom Lane <[email protected]>; PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 07:37, Neil Conway wrote:
> The second audience is the people who are really interested in exactly
> what has changed between the new release of PostgreSQL and the previous
> release series. It is important that we make it easy for an admin
> planning a PostgreSQL upgrade at a fairly large site to be able to see
> what changes in PostgreSQL have been made, and what changes will be
> necessary in their own applications.
Something I was pondering the other day was whether a pg_compat_chk utility
would be practical/desirable. You run it against your existing database /
schema dump and it prints a set of warnings:
Old version = 7.2.1
New version = 7.4.0
Warning: schema support introduced (v7.3)
all objects will be placed in the default schema
Failure: DEFAULT 'now' not supported (v7.4)
table1.column2
table2.column3
Notice: timestamp now holds milliseconds by default (v7.3)
tableX.whatever
My main concern would be that a 90% solution might be worse than nothing at
all.
Incidentally, this is not idle speculation, but something I might well have
time to stick in gborg during the 7.5 devt cycle.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Automatic compat checking? (was 7.4 compatibility question)
@ 2003-10-23 10:06 Richard Huxton <[email protected]>
parent: Christoph Haller <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Richard Huxton @ 2003-10-23 10:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Haller <[email protected]>; +Cc: [email protected]
On Friday 24 October 2003 00:01, Christoph Haller wrote:
>
> A pg_compat_chk utility sounds great.
> No idea, if this is practical, but it's desirable - at least to me.
Well, I'm confident the first 90% is practical just by running some regexps
against a pg_dumped schema. It doesn't need to guarantee there's a problem,
just say "here's something you want to check". And there are things you could
probably never check convincingly (e.g. the queries in an application). It's
that final 10% that makes me uncertain.
Maybe it'd be enough to just list "tests I couldn't perform", at first anyway.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-23 10:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-10-22 09:30 Automatic compat checking? (was 7.4 compatibility question) Richard Huxton <[email protected]>
1970-01-01 00:00 ` Christoph Haller <[email protected]>
2003-10-23 10:06 ` Richard Huxton <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox