Joseph S wrote:
> If you don't mind the downtime it would be simpler to upgrade to 8.2 and
> then worry about Slony. If you do mind you can use slony to do the
> upgrade which needs much less downtime as you switch servers.
Interesting point. It's a 24/7 environment, so downtime is unacceptable.
Thanks for the response.
>
> Geoffrey wrote:
>> We plan to upgrade from our current 7.4.17 Postgresql to 8.2.? in the
>> near future. We also plan to implement a replication solution, most
>> likely Slony.
>>
>> We know that the upgrade to 8.2.? will require some code changes.
>>
>> Question is, is there a particular order in which we should perform
>> these changes that would require the least amount of additional work?
>>
>> That is, would it be more efficient to move to 8.2.? and then
>> implement our Slony replication, or would there be less effort in
>> implementing the Slony solution and then upgrading to 8.2.? ?
>>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin