Bruce Momjian wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On m?n, 2011-06-27 at 14:34 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
It's easier to read the patches if you do separate changes in separate
patches. Anyway, I'm a bit nervous about this hunk:
+
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On m?n, 2011-06-27 at 14:34 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
It's easier to read the patches if you do separate changes in separate
patches. Anyway, I'm a bit nervous about this hunk:
+ if
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie jun 24 22:22:55 -0400 2011:
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
You want the environment variable support removed?
I don't. It's
Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie jun 24 22:22:55 -0400 2011:
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
You want the environment variable support
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie jun 24 22:22:55 -0400 2011:
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Bruce Momjian
\Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie jun 24 22:22:55 -0400 2011:
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
OK, fair enough. Should I apply my ports patch to Postgres 9.2?
I'm not sure which patch you are referring to.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
OK, fair enough. ?Should I apply my ports patch to Postgres 9.2?
I'm not sure which patch you are referring to.
This one which makes 50432 the default port.
--
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
OK, fair enough. ?Should I apply my ports patch to Postgres 9.2?
I'm not sure which patch you are referring to.
This one which
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
OK, fair enough. ?Should I apply my ports patch to Postgres 9.2?
I'm not sure which patch you are
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
OK, fair enough. ?Should I apply my
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
OK, fair
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Robert Haas
On mån, 2011-06-27 at 14:34 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
It's easier to read the patches if you do separate changes in separate
patches. Anyway, I'm a bit nervous about this hunk:
+ if (old_cluster.port == DEF_PGUPORT)
+
On fre, 2011-06-24 at 19:47 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I'm wondering why pg_upgrade needs environment variables at all. It's a
one-shot operation. Environment variables are typically used to shared
default settings across programs. I don't see how that applies here.
They were there in
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
In the above case, you create a bunch of traps. If the user abandons
the attempt to run pg_upgrade but leaves the shell open, comes back at
some other time (or, say, someone else who also logs into the shared
postgres account), and runs just pg_upgrade for lack of a
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie jun 24 22:22:55 -0400 2011:
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
You want the environment variable support removed?
I don't. It's production usefulness is questionable, but it's quite
handy for testing IMO.
If
On tor, 2011-06-23 at 21:39 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I have created the following patch which uses 25432 as the default port
number for pg_upgrade.
I don't think we should just steal a port from the reserved range.
Picking a random port from the private/dynamic range seems more
appropriate.
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
It also creates two new environment variables,
OLDPGPORT and NEWPGPORT, to control the port values because we don't
want to default to PGPORT anymore.
I would prefer that all PostgreSQL-related environment variables
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On tor, 2011-06-23 at 21:39 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I have created the following patch which uses 25432 as the default port
number for pg_upgrade.
I don't think we should just steal a port from the reserved range.
Picking a random port from the private/dynamic
On fre, 2011-06-24 at 16:34 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
It also creates two new environment variables,
OLDPGPORT and NEWPGPORT, to control the port values because we
don't
want to default to PGPORT anymore.
I would prefer that all PostgreSQL-related environment variables
start
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On fre, 2011-06-24 at 16:34 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
It also creates two new environment variables,
OLDPGPORT and NEWPGPORT, to control the port values because we
don't
want to default to PGPORT anymore.
I would prefer that all PostgreSQL-related
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On fre, 2011-06-24 at 16:34 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
It also creates two new environment variables,
OLDPGPORT and NEWPGPORT, to control the port values because we
don't
want to default
25 matches
Mail list logo
