Re: [GENERAL] re-instalation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Brett W. McCoy
Subject Re: [GENERAL] re-instalation
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.30.0101201631140.4421-100000@chapelperilous.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] re-instalation  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> > The problem with just moving your database to the new location is that
> > there are location dependencies built into it when you use initdb to
> > initialize it, so it's not reliable.
>
> AFAIK, there are *not* any location dependencies in a standard PG
> database (other than path names associated with alternate database
> locations, if you are so foolish as to use hard-wired alternate-location
> pathnames).  So in theory Martin should have been able to tar up the
> entire $PGDATA tree and move it somewhere else.  I'm not sure why he's
> reporting a problem, but I don't think that's it.

Ah, right... I misunderstood and thought he had also changed to a
different version because of OS incompatilities.  Never mind. :-)

-- Brett
                                     http://www.chapelperilous.net/~bmccoy/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vax Vobiscum


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Dmitri E. Gurevich"
Date:
Subject: Strange error in PHP/Postgre on RadHat?
Next
From: Patrick Welche
Date:
Subject: Strange..