Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-18 Thread Luca Barbato
Tiziano Müller wrote: Luca Barbato wrote: It gives an annoyance please reconsider. Done that. Won't change. See my answer to dberkholz's message. As long you keep a meta package, as you told in the reply I read just now, seems a good plan in the end. lu -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Me

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-17 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 3:06 AM, Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > > I personally have no opinion about the -base and -server split, since > > I do not know enough about it. But I am firmly against the -docs split > > since the doc USE flag is for this use-cas

[gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-17 Thread Tiziano Müller
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > I personally have no opinion about the -base and -server split, since > I do not know enough about it. But I am firmly against the -docs split > since the doc USE flag is for this use-case, and I see no reason why > not to use it. > > Just stick a USE=doc on -base and be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-17 Thread Carsten Lohrke
On Mittwoch, 16. April 2008, Tiziano Müller wrote: > While the dump command can read clusters created by an older version it is > still necessary to dump and reload your data on version bumps between major > versions [... Of course. I didn't question the dump and reload cycle. Just saying you have

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-17 Thread Enrico Weigelt
* Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > While the dump command can read clusters created by an older version it is > still necessary to dump and reload your data on version bumps between major > versions as written in That's the point where MVCC is needed, at least for critical applicati

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-17 Thread Enrico Weigelt
* Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > > WRONG we aren't debian. > This is why we decided not to split out headers, clients and contrib. Actually, I'd like to see them all split out. But this sooner or later requires the upstream (or an intermediate layer, like OSS-QM) to support this -

[gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-17 Thread Tiziano Müller
Luca Barbato wrote: > Tiziano Müller wrote: >> What do the new ebuilds offer: >> a) A split into dev-db/postgresql-{base,server,docs}. > > WRONG we aren't debian. This is why we decided not to split out headers, clients and contrib. > >> Now, I know that >> splitting up packages isn't the Gento

[gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-16 Thread Tiziano Müller
Carsten Lohrke wrote: >> c) Upgrading between major versions of PostgreSQL requires the DB admin >> to bump the database using the old version, moving the database away and >> to reload the dump into a new database cluster using the new version of >> PostgreSQL. Having to take down the old server

[gentoo-dev] Re: PostgreSQL Status

2008-04-16 Thread Tiziano Müller
Donnie Berkholz wrote: > On 09:55 Wed 16 Apr , Tiziano Müller wrote: >> What do the new ebuilds offer: >> a) A split into dev-db/postgresql-{base,server,docs}. Now, I know that >> splitting up packages isn't the Gentoo way. I know we could have done it >> using USE flags but this approach give