Re: [HACKERS] symbol mismatches on minor version upgrades

2011-09-02 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tis, 2011-08-30 at 15:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: While not wishing to deny that this can be a problem, I think you're overstating this aspect: Now if this had been, say, plpython, which is also developed closely together with the backend, but is probably shipped in a separate binary

Re: [HACKERS] symbol mismatches on minor version upgrades

2011-09-02 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: On tis, 2011-08-30 at 15:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: This is not possible at least in the Red Hat world, because all the subpackages have exact-version-and-release dependencies tying them together. That's distro policy not just my whim, and I'd expect

[HACKERS] symbol mismatches on minor version upgrades

2011-08-30 Thread Peter Eisentraut
A while ago, I blogged about the following problem: (http://petereisentraut.blogspot.com/2011/07/undefined-symbol.html) Between PG 8.4.4 and 8.4.5, a new symbol PinPortal was added to the backend and plpgsql was changed to call it. So in that particular case, upgrading plpgsql without also

Re: [HACKERS] symbol mismatches on minor version upgrades

2011-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: A while ago, I blogged about the following problem: (http://petereisentraut.blogspot.com/2011/07/undefined-symbol.html) While not wishing to deny that this can be a problem, I think you're overstating this aspect: Now if this had been, say, plpython,