On 10-11-17 10:58 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:

I'm thinking we might want to release a 1.2.22 soon.

A handful of things have accumulated up in the 1.2 branch.

git log  REL_1_2_STABLE ^REL_1_2_21

These changes have been applied already, I think in 
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=slony1-engine.git;a=commit;h=0d1781229fd3cc6a2abac083174166945d08ed7f

That commit also fixes a bug that will show up in 8.4 and later.

Other than that I am not aware of any issues 1.2 will have with 9.0.  I 
haven't done much testing of 1.2 with 9.0 (have others?) but while I was 
testing 2.0.x against 9.0 betas I don't recall seeing anything that 
needed back-porting.




> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Jaime Casanova<jaime at 2ndquadrant.com>  wrote:
>>
>> so, is this something i have to worry about? more important, does
>> slony 1.2.21 support 9.0?
>>
>
> ah! seems like the function load_slony_base() in slonik.c should be
> updated but not sure how...
> because the condition seems to be including 8.4, besides it needs to
> know that 8.5 doesn't exists but is 9.0 instead
>
> now being the case that every one of those versions all use the schema
> for 8.1 then it seems safe, at least until 8.4... 9.0 will use the
> same schema? anything to be worried?
>
> """
>          else if ((adminfo->pg_version>= 80100)&&  adminfo->pg_version
> <  80500) /* 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4 */
>          {
>                  use_major = 8;
>                  use_minor = 1;
>          }
>          else    /* 8.5+ */
>          {
>                  use_major = 8;
>                  use_minor = 1;
>                  printf("%s:%d: Possible unsupported PostgreSQL "
>                          "version (%d) %d.%d, defaulting to 8.1 support\n",
>                          stmt->stmt_filename, stmt->stmt_lno,
> adminfo->pg_version,
>                          (adminfo->pg_version/10000),
> ((adminfo->pg_version%10000)/100));
>          }
>
> """
>