Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-29 Thread Michał Piotrowski
2010/12/29 Toshio Kuratomi : > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 07:36:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I have pushed PostgreSQL 9.0.2 into rawhide, replacing the 8.4.x release >> series. >> >> As is usual with PostgreSQL major version updates, 9.0.x won't read >> 8.4.x's database files.  However, this time ar

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-29 Thread Michał Piotrowski
2010/12/29 Tom Lane : > Toshio Kuratomi writes: >> I know some people were talking about making systemd unit files for >> a significant subset of services one of the features for F15.  I do not, >> however, see a Feature page (even an incomplete Feature page) for that yet. > >> Would someone who i

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-29 Thread Tom Lane
Toshio Kuratomi writes: > I know some people were talking about making systemd unit files for > a significant subset of services one of the features for F15. I do not, > however, see a Feature page (even an incomplete Feature page) for that yet. > Would someone who is working on that care to say

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-29 Thread drago01
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 07:36:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I have pushed PostgreSQL 9.0.2 into rawhide, replacing the 8.4.x release >> series. >> >> As is usual with PostgreSQL major version updates, 9.0.x won't read >> 8.4.x's database

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-29 Thread Toshio Kuratomi
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 07:36:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I have pushed PostgreSQL 9.0.2 into rawhide, replacing the 8.4.x release > series. > > As is usual with PostgreSQL major version updates, 9.0.x won't read > 8.4.x's database files. However, this time around there is an option > to not ha

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-28 Thread Dennis Gilmore
On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 10:52:44 pm Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 23:12:12 -0500, > > Tom Lane wrote: > > Yeah, it's intentional that the config files aren't copied, since we > > don't have any automated way of figuring out what you changed in the > > old versions (and

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-28 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 23:12:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah, it's intentional that the config files aren't copied, since we > don't have any automated way of figuring out what you changed in the > old versions (and just blindly dropping the old ones into the new > version is a bad plan). The

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-28 Thread Tom Lane
Bruno Wolff III writes: > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 19:36:35 -0500, > Tom Lane wrote: >> I have pushed PostgreSQL 9.0.2 into rawhide, replacing the 8.4.x release >> series. >> >> Please let me know of either successful or unsuccessful upgrades. > I tried it out and it seems to have worked. > p

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-28 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 21:47:41 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 19:36:35 -0500, > Tom Lane wrote: > > I have pushed PostgreSQL 9.0.2 into rawhide, replacing the 8.4.x release > > series. > > > > Please let me know of either successful or unsuccessful upgrades. The m

Re: [HEADS-UP] PostgreSQL 9.0.2 now in rawhide

2010-12-28 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 19:36:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I have pushed PostgreSQL 9.0.2 into rawhide, replacing the 8.4.x release > series. > > Please let me know of either successful or unsuccessful upgrades. I tried it out and it seems to have worked. pg_hba.conf and pg_ident.conf didn't g