Absolutely.
Do a pg_dumpall before any version upgrade.
My point was that RH has screwed up many software packages lately by
switching to the new NPTL version of glibc. Not only is it in RH 9, but
they also replaced the libraries in RH 8.0. They recently patched the
new glibc and broke more things...
At least FreeBSD accepts patches, and implements them giving the
submitter credit withing a short time. I recently patched the
radiusd-cistron port to fix some problems that would cause core dumps,
and tidied up some uninitialized variables.
If the problem was just failure to backup the databases before
installing a new version of PG then, that is nobodies failt but the
administrator. Reading errata, and other standards docs before install
one would discover they needed to dump and delete before the upgrade
then restore the data afterwards.
The RH issues I was rerferenceing came with *NO* warnings that all sorts
of things would imminently be broken.
I am tired of people sticking up for RH's failure to do proper QA tests,
and there closed opensource ideas.
Guy
Lamar Owen wrote:
>On Tuesday 15 April 2003 14:23, Guy Fraser wrote:
>
>
>>What a mess...
>>RH has fouled up a lot of stuff lately...
>>I'm not even going to go there...
>>
>>
>
>It's as much a problem with other RPM-based distributions of Linux as it is
>with Red Hat. And I am of the strong opinion that it is just as much the
>fault of the way PostgreSQL forces upgrades as it is a fault with any
>particular distributor.
>
>Even a straight portupgrade on FreeBSD is broken. It's a mess because of the
>way PostgreSQL needs to be upgraded.
>
>
