pg_upgrade doc uses inconsistent versions within the doc.
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/pgupgrade.html
Description:
I feel like for readability the pg_upgrade doc should use the same
old_version and new_version examples when showing examples throughout the
doc page.
as an exmaple I'm looking at :
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgupgrade.html
in some places the example commands use v9.6 and v16. (see step 8)
but in other places it mixes versions v9.5 and v9.6 (see step 11 sub step 8)
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:14:04PM +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/pgupgrade.html
Description:I feel like for readability the pg_upgrade doc should use the same
old_version and new_version examples when showing examples throughout the
doc page.as an exmaple I'm looking at :
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgupgrade.htmlin some places the example commands use v9.6 and v16. (see step 8)
but in other places it mixes versions v9.5 and v9.6 (see step 11 sub step 8)
Good point. I came up with the attached patch. It uses 9.6 and current
--- the only problem is that the target directory is now: /vol1/pg_tblsp/PG_&majorversion;_202307071
---------
and since the catalog version is not accessible from SGML, it will
usually not match the major version's catalog number.
I would apply this only to Postgres 17 since it isn't really a fix.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
Attachments:
upgrade_version.difftext/x-diff; charset=us-asciiDownload+4-4
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:35 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:14:04PM +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/pgupgrade.html
Description:I feel like for readability the pg_upgrade doc should use the same
old_version and new_version examples when showing examples throughout the
doc page.as an exmaple I'm looking at :
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgupgrade.htmlin some places the example commands use v9.6 and v16. (see step 8)
but in other places it mixes versions v9.5 and v9.6 (see step 11 sub
step 8)
Good point. I came up with the attached patch. It uses 9.6 and current
I would get rid of any mentions of our old pre-v10 versioning scheme in the
current documentation.
David J.
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:56:27AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:35 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 08:14:04PM +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/pgupgrade.html
Description:I feel like for readability the pg_upgrade doc should use the same
old_version and new_version examples when showing examples throughout the
doc page.as an exmaple I'm looking at :
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgupgrade.htmlin some places the example commands use v9.6 and v16. (see step 8)
but in other places it mixes versions v9.5 and v9.6 (see step 11 sub step
8)
Good point. I came up with the attached patch. It uses 9.6 and current
I would get rid of any mentions of our old pre-v10 versioning scheme in the
current documentation.
Good point, how is this attached patch?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
Attachments:
upgrade_version.difftext/x-diff; charset=us-asciiDownload+11-11
On 26 Sep 2023, at 22:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:56:27AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
I would get rid of any mentions of our old pre-v10 versioning scheme in the
current documentation.
For content such as this, a very big +1.
Good point, how is this attached patch?
LGTM.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 09:42:49AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
On 26 Sep 2023, at 22:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:56:27AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:I would get rid of any mentions of our old pre-v10 versioning scheme in the
current documentation.For content such as this, a very big +1.
Good point, how is this attached patch?
LGTM.
Patch applied back to PG 16.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.