Sat Oct 1 00:08:02 PDT 2005
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Dave Page wrote: > OK, we'll aim for Tuesday then. Yup, I'll give you a 'go'. Um, seeing that apparently nothing I posted in the last 4 weeks to slony-general is fixed appropriately or finally discussed, and we really need to roll a beta quite soon, I'm afraid we'll have to fork the slony creation scripts. We already discussed to include the creation scripts into pgadmin installations to make administrator's life easier, but apparently we *must* do that to have pgadmin working on slony 1.1. I just tested slony cvs head, and found that creation from scratch (using the unmodified slony scripts) will work ok, but joining will fail with the bug reported repeatedly from enablenode_int inserting into sl_confirm (illegal default for con_timestamp). Since I didn't test 1.1.1, this might not apply to that version, don't know so far, don't have the time to test right now. Second, there's still not a viable alternative how to store path information without admin nodes. I'm running out of time now, so I'll continue that way, we'll have to make sure that in our fork listens are generated from enabled nodes only (AFAICS usual slonik work will never leave un-enabled nodes, so nobody should ever notice). To identify the version, I'll add a slonyAdminVersion() so that pgAdmin can be sure it runs on a workable version, or recommend upgrading (probably another case for the guru). AFAIR upgradeNode isn't implemented yet, will do that this weekend. Regards, Andreas
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list