On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 05:29:49PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of mié ago 08 17:15:38 -0400 2012: > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 04:23:04PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > > Yes, the list of rough edges is the 14-steps you have to perform to run > > > > pg_upgrade, as documented in the pg_upgrade manual page: > > > > > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/pgupgrade.html > > > > > > > > The unknown is how to reduce the number of steps in a way the community > > > > would find acceptable. > > > > > > I think this is one good idea: > > > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/29806.1340655...@sss.pgh.pa.us > > > > > > The number of steps is an issue, but the likelihood of the actual > > > pg_upgrade run failing or doing the wrong thing is also something we > > > need to work on. > > > > If we currently require 14 steps to use pg_upgrade, how would that > > reduce this number? What failures does it fix? > > I think those 14 is a bit of a made-up number. Several of those steps > are about building pg_upgrade, not actually using it. And there are > some that are optional anyway. > > The suggestion by Tom reduces the list by two steps because it doesn't > need to adjust pg_hba.conf or put it back in the original way > afterwards.
True. > Another thing worth considering is to have pg_upgrade init, stop and > start clusters as necessary instead of requesting the user to do it. > I think this is two less steps. pg_upgrade already starts/stops the server --- it just checks to make sure they are both stopped. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
