On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Hans-Rudolf Hotz <h...@fmi.ch> wrote:

> @ Dannon
>
>
> > While we definitely do recommend that if you have the option to
> > choose, go with postgres, Galaxy should function both now and in the
> > future with MySQL.  In this case, your galaxy will function just fine
> > without that index.
>
> I assume there are a lot of 'old' Galaxy servers using MySQL around, where
> the 'galaxy admin' (like me) would love to switch to postgres. Maybe we can
> do a community effort putting together a "MySQL-to-postgres" protocol for a
> defined Galaxy release? And after that release, only postgres is supported.
> I am sure this would make a lot of things easier.....something to discuss
> in Oslo?
>

Sure, it's definitely something to discuss if we keep running into these
issues, but my hope is really that upgrading SqlAlchemy will obviate the
need to deal with this at all, and that everything will 'just work' going
forward with whatever database folks want to use.  That said, if there are
others who want to just go ahead and migrate from MySQL to postgres a
tested protocol for doing so would be a great thing to try and put together
as a community and I'd be happy to help.

-Dannon
___________________________________________________________
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

  http://lists.bx.psu.edu/

Reply via email to