[postgis-devel] PSC Vote: Change PostGIS library name to drop the minor

[Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski]

I think we need someone to set up experiment, if it is possible to symlink
just any library before update, or if it should really match. If it's not
called in upgrade and stuff like autovacuum/autoanalyze/whatever uses
postgis functions silently are shut down, it may happen that just presence
of a shim is enough.

Looking at linux .../lib directories, it's common for liblibrary-1.2.3 to
have a symlink from liblibrary-1.2 and from liblibrary-1 and from
liblibrary.so. It may also be a way to deal with it.

ср, 30 авг. 2017 г. в 11:48, Sandro Santilli <strk at kbt.io>:

> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 01:19:03AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> > That is, if you have 9.4 + 2.2 and 9.5 + 2.3, pg_upgrade will refuse to
> > run because it's looking in the 9.5 version for the 2.2 .so file and not
> > finding it.  Users have to first upgrade to 9.4 + 2.3 and then run
> > pg_upgrade to get to 9.5 + 2.3.
>
> But pg_upgrade makes NO ATTEMPT at every running an ALTER EXTENSION,
> correct ? That means that *even* if you have a 2.2 .so file under 9.5
> you might still be left with half-broken PostGIS (ie: scripts not
> using 9.5 only features).
>
> That's why I'm suggesting that pg_upgrade could improve its checking
> (since it does implement part of it).
> Or allow dropping the initial check (as I think you can still run
> ALTER EXTENSION UPDATE while missing the old .so file, right?)
>
> --strk;
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20170830/ce989d56/attachment.html>