Re: pg_upgrade using appname to lock out other users

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu> writes:
> > As an operations guy, the idea of an upgrade using a random,
> > non-repeatable port selection gives me the hebejeebees.
> 
> Yeah, I agree.  The latest version of the patch doesn't appear to have
> any random component to it, though --- it just expects the user to
> provide port numbers as switches.

Oh, you wanted pg_upgrade to pick a random port number?  I can do that,
but how would it check to see it is unused?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +