Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Friday 03 July 2009 02:28:22 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I looked at that and the problem is that pg_migrator must be built
> > against the _new_ source tree, and will issue an error and exit if it
> > isn't. The problem with PGXS is it silently chooses the source tree to
On Friday 03 July 2009 02:28:22 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I looked at that and the problem is that pg_migrator must be built
> against the _new_ source tree, and will issue an error and exit if it
> isn't. The problem with PGXS is it silently chooses the source tree to
> use based on which pg_config
Joe Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> >>> Consistency here is pointless. IIRC the dual method is used in contrib
> >>> because people did not trust the PGXS stuff enough to rip the original
> >>> Make code out; or maybe because people did not w
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The main reason contrib still has the alternate method is that PGXS
> doesn't really work until after you've installed the core build.
> For modules distributed separately from core, it doesn't seem that
> exciting to be able to build using the cont
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera writes:
Consistency here is pointless. IIRC the dual method is used in contrib
because people did not trust the PGXS stuff enough to rip the original
Make code out; or maybe because people did not want PGXS to become the
default build method
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Consistency here is pointless. IIRC the dual method is used in contrib
> > because people did not trust the PGXS stuff enough to rip the original
> > Make code out; or maybe because people did not want PGXS to become the
> > default build method, but t
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Consistency here is pointless. IIRC the dual method is used in contrib
> because people did not trust the PGXS stuff enough to rip the original
> Make code out; or maybe because people did not want PGXS to become the
> default build method, but they allowed it to be used
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I am happy to remove the USE_PGXS from the Makefile, but it seems all
> the other extensions require that so I want to be consistent.
Consistency here is pointless. IIRC the dual method is used in contrib
because people did not trust the PGXS stuff enough to rip the origin
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> (Although actually, if that pg_config isn't in your path, the
> >> installed pg_migrator won't be either. It might be better to just
> >> say "fix things so that the new installation's executables are
> >> first in your PATH", and b
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> (Although actually, if that pg_config isn't in your path, the
>> installed pg_migrator won't be either. It might be better to just
>> say "fix things so that the new installation's executables are
>> first in your PATH", and be done with it.)
> I am bet
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Also, the recommendation to specify prefix here is redundant and
> >> error-prone. It can get the correct prefix from pg_config.
>
> > Again, see my email just posted about using pg_migrator in a
> > multi-pg_config-binary environm
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Also, the recommendation to specify prefix here is redundant and
>> error-prone. It can get the correct prefix from pg_config.
> Again, see my email just posted about using pg_migrator in a
> multi-pg_config-binary environment.
What's your point? If t
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > On Friday 19 June 2009 00:56:42 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> A third install method is to use PGXS
> >> (assuming the new 'pg_config' is in your $PATH):
> >>
> >> USE_PGXS=1 gmake prefix=/usr/local/pgsql.new install
>
> > Maybe the latter method should
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Friday 19 June 2009 00:56:42 Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > The makefile for pg_migrator currently assumes by default that it is
> > > located under contrib/. Which confuses me.
> >
> > You can compile pg_migrator by copying it to /contrib, or using PGXS;
> > both work.
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On Friday 19 June 2009 00:56:42 Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> A third install method is to use PGXS
>> (assuming the new 'pg_config' is in your $PATH):
>>
>> USE_PGXS=1 gmake prefix=/usr/local/pgsql.new install
> Maybe the latter method should be the default, as it matches b
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I wonder why we have two ways at all (I'm not counting the stuff
> about copying it to contrib because it seems pointless). The other
> day I was looking at orafce code in pgfoundry, and at clearxlogtail
> too IIRC, and they both had the "ifdef USE_PGXS" stuff in the
>
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Friday 19 June 2009 00:56:42 Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > The makefile for pg_migrator currently assumes by default that it is
> > > located under contrib/. Which confuses me.
> >
> > You can compile pg_migrator by copying it to /contrib, or using PGXS;
> > both work.
On Friday 19 June 2009 00:56:42 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > The makefile for pg_migrator currently assumes by default that it is
> > located under contrib/. Which confuses me.
>
> You can compile pg_migrator by copying it to /contrib, or using PGXS;
> both work. Read the 15-step install instruction
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Saturday 06 June 2009 16:21:22 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Now that pg_migrator is in beta
> > > (http://pgfoundry.org/frs/?group_id=1000235), I was wondering if we want
> > > to mention pg_migrator anywhere in our docs or release notes? Josh
>
On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Having gotten no replies I assume we don't want to mention pg_migrator
in the release notes or documentation, which is fine.
I know this project has resistance to putting URL links in the
documentation. One option I was thinking about was creating som
On Saturday 06 June 2009 16:21:22 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Now that pg_migrator is in beta
> > (http://pgfoundry.org/frs/?group_id=1000235), I was wondering if we want
> > to mention pg_migrator anywhere in our docs or release notes? Josh
> > Berkus is already mentioning it
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Now that pg_migrator is in beta (http://pgfoundry.org/frs/?group_id=1000235),
> I was wondering if we want to mention pg_migrator anywhere in our docs
> or release notes? Josh Berkus is already mentioning it in the draft
> press release.
Having gotten no replies I assume
Now that pg_migrator is in beta (http://pgfoundry.org/frs/?group_id=1000235),
I was wondering if we want to mention pg_migrator anywhere in our docs
or release notes? Josh Berkus is already mentioning it in the draft
press release.
I expect a final pg_migrator 8.4 release by the end of next wee
23 matches
Mail list logo
