[postgis-devel] RFC3

[Paragon Corporation]

Mark,
I wasn't so much thinking about different versions but more as people who
upgraded from 1.2 to say 1.3 without a dump reload.  In those cases some may
be using the st_ and some may be using the non-st version for the operators.

If it was simply an issue of the st_ .. Like I said -- I'm pretty sure a
ALTER FUNCTION RENAME to some other name we haven't used would suffice.  I
think Mark the suggestion for names you had would work since those have
never been used. 

Thanks,
Regina

-----Original Message-----
From: postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
[mailto:postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Mark
Cave-Ayland
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:46 PM
To: PostGIS Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] RFC3

Paul Ramsey wrote:

> *sigh* You're right, the fact that many of the system st_* variants 
> that I hate, and want to remove, are underneath operators and types 
> makes it impossible to get rid of them cleanly without losing soft 
> upgrade.  I guess I will just have to move this to 2.0, when 
> dump/restore will be mandatory.
> 
> P

For an upgrade between minor versions, I have no problem with manually
altering the catalogues as part of the update script. I think we need to
accept that we may need an upgrades/ directory containing .sql files to
allow upgrading between different versions.


ATB,

Mark.

--
Mark Cave-Ayland - Senior Technical Architect PostgreSQL - PostGIS Sirius
Corporation plc - control through freedom http://www.siriusit.co.uk
t: +44 870 608 0063
_______________________________________________
postgis-devel mailing list
postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel