Re: Fixing busted citext function declarations
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fixing busted citext function declarations |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2090.1431041516@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fixing busted citext function declarations ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> pg_upgrade is okay in any case because it dumps and reloads the current >> extension's components. Doesn't matter whether there's another version >> that is not compatible. > For clarity - which one is "current" in this context? > 1. The existing database's (previous extension version) > 2. The target database's (current default extension version in the new > PostgreSQL version) > The answer has to be #2 since the version in the existing database no > longer exists in the new PostgreSQL version. You're mistaken. pg_dump --binary_upgrade does not care whether the target database thinks that version exists or not. (It does care that there's a compatible shared-library object, but that's not at issue in this case.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: