The initdb is not always a bad thing. In reality the idea of just being able to "upgrade" is not a good thing. Just think about the differences between 7.2.3 and 7.3.x... The most annoying (although appropriate) one being that integers can no longer be ''.
If we provide the ability to do a wholesale upgrade many things would just break. Heck even the connection protocol is different for 7.4.
J
Dennis Gearon wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 10:50, Andrew Rawnsley wrote:He is right, it might be a good idea to head this problem 'off at the pass'. I am usually pretty good at predicting technilogical trends. I've made some money at it. And I predict that Postgres will eclipse MySQL and be in the top 5 of all databases deployed. But it does have some achilles tendon's.
Small soapbox moment here...
ANYTHING that can be done to eliminate having to do an initdb on version changes would make a lot of people do cartwheels. 'Do a dump/reload' sometimes comes across a bit casually on the lists (my apologies if it isn't meant to be), but it can be be incredibly onerous to do on a large production system. That's probably why you run across people running stupid-old versions.
And this will become even more of an issue as it's PG's popularity
grows with large and 24x7 databases.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
-- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-222-2783 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.commandprompt.com The most reliable support for the most reliable Open Source database.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
