Re: LedgerSMB 1.3.6-rc1 released

[Philip Rhoades <..hidden..>]

People,


On 2011-11-26 09:46, Chris Travers wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 6:08 AM, David A. Bandel
> <..hidden..> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 18:11, Chris Travers 
> > <..hidden..> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Ok.  So with a server, my primary concern is that upgrading things 
> > > is
> > > always a somewhat risky process.  Basically, when you upgrade, you
> > > risk breaking things, so generally speaking you want to have longer
> > > terms of support and a more lazy upgrade cycle.  And there are a
> > > couple things about the Fedora upgrade process that are 
> > > particularly
> > > risky.  For example yum distrosync will upgrade major versions of
> > > PostgreSQL for you, meaning if you didn't dump your data first, 
> > > your
> > > PostgreSQL db is now unusable.
> >
> > I hope you're joking.  While a Debian upgrade is not the easiest 
> > thing
> > in the world (they do their best to make it so, though), at least 
> > this
> > is not an issue.  You run postgresql versions in parallel until you
> > finally get rid of the old one because the new one works properly 
> > for
> > you.
>
> I am not joking.  I always back up before an upgrade....
> fortunately....  but I have noticed this happen.


I do a nightly pg_dump (in text mode these days ie not natively 
compressed) and again just before the upgrade if necessary.  So I can 
just import back into the new DB.  I keep as many daily backups as my 
backup drive allows and only delete old days when space starts running 
short (but I still keep EOM backups).  It hasn't failed me so far but in 
this case I do not have to worry about having to upgrade from LSMB 1.2 
to 1.3 - my other PG stuff doesn't have the same issues I guess . .


> > I've gone through 8.4->9.0->9.1 (and many before I can't remember)
> > upgrades w/ no problem (personally I use testing, even for my own
> > servers).  With Debian, they leave both database versions running
> > until you've dealt with any upgrade issues.  So far, I've only had
> > one, that was when a contrib stored procedure I was using didn't 
> > make
> > it from 8.4->9.0 (but it appeared again in 9.1).
>
> That's the right way to do things.


Agreed.


Regards,

Phil.
--
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Australia
E-mail:  ..hidden..