Tom Lane wrote: > Christopher Browne <cbbro...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > >> [ just recommend using a different port number during pg_upgrade ] > > > +1... That seems to have lots of nice properties. > > Yeah, that seems like an appropriate expenditure of effort. It's surely > not bulletproof, since someone could intentionally connect to the actual > port number, but getting to bulletproof is a lot more work than anyone > seems to want to do right now. (And, as Bruce pointed out, no complete > solution would be back-patchable anyway.)
OK, let me work on that. -- 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
