Re: (A) native Windows port

On Tuesday 09 July 2002 11:41 am, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> The old postmaster should not be built/distributed. As it is for
> _upgrading_ only, you just have to _keep_ it when doing an upgrade, not
> build a new "old" one ;)

Let me reiterate one thing about this. In the midst of a total OS upgrade,
during which PostgreSQL is being upgraded as well (the new OS release
includes a 'better' PostgreSQL), you also get library upgrades. If the
upgrade is from an old enough version of the OS, the old postmaster/postgres
may not even be able to execute AT ALL.

Some may say that this is a problem for the vendor. Well I know of one vendor
that has thrown up its hands in disgust over our lack of upgradability that
they have now quit supporting even the kludgy semi-automatic upgrade process
I did up three years ago. They will refuse to support any mechanism that
requires any portion of an old package to remain around. The new package
must be self-contained and must be able to upgrade the old data, or they will
not accept it.

Their statement now is simply that PostgreSQL upgrading is broken; dump before
upgrading and complain to the PostgreSQL developers.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11