<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>We just need to fix the view. I think you can copy the definition from 2.5 and backport to 2.4.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Looks like the new function </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#0D0A0B;background:white'>pg_get_constraintdef </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>we are using has existed at least since 9.2 so we should be okay with 2.4 fixing<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/functions-info.html#FUNCTIONS-INFO-CATALOG-TABLE">https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/functions-info.html#FUNCTIONS-INFO-CATALOG-TABLE</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> postgis-devel [mailto:postgis-devel-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Paul Ramsey<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, September 24, 2019 1:00 PM<br><b>To:</b> PostGIS Development Discussion <postgis-devel@lists.osgeo.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [postgis-devel] In Place Upgrade<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Sep 24, 2019, at 9:58 AM, <a href="mailto:rmrodriguez@carto.com">rmrodriguez@carto.com</a> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal>Already at 2.5.3…<br>postgis25_11-2.5.3-3.rhel7.x86_64<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><br>That's the binary, are the scripts installed in the database at 2.5.3 too?<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Yes, this isn’t a production system, this is a blank (with one spatial table) database created today just to test upgrading against packages.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal>What would fixing 2.4 entail? Is there a ticket I can use to track this down? I think it’s worthwhile, probably.<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><br>It was done for 3 and 2.5 in <a href="https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/4231">https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/4231</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>P<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br>-- <br>Raúl Marín Rodríguez<br><a href="http://carto.com">carto.com</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>postgis-devel mailing list<br><a href="mailto:postgis-devel@lists.osgeo.org">postgis-devel@lists.osgeo.org</a><br><a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>