Re: PGXS testing upgrade paths - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PGXS testing upgrade paths
Date
Msg-id 952111.1600704072@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PGXS testing upgrade paths  (James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:36 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> The recommended way to deal with updates these days is to leave the
>> original extension script as-is and just write update scripts
>> (1.0--1.1, 1.1--1.2, etc).  That way, application of the updates
>> is tested automatically every time you do CREATE EXTENSION.

> Ah, so just don't add a new 1.2 file, etc.

> That also implies not having more direct upgrade paths (e.g., 1.0--1.2)?

Right.  Once the accumulation of cruft starts to impact install time
substantially, maybe you want to roll things up to a new base version.
But at least with the contrib modules we've found that it's seldom
worth the trouble.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: James Coleman
Date:
Subject: Re: PGXS testing upgrade paths
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: Planner, check if can use consider HASH for groupings (src/backend/optimizer/plan/planner.c)