On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:24:17PM -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2018, David Fetter wrote:
> 
> >On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 09:30:40PM -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
> >>On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, David Fetter wrote:
> >>>Folks,
> >>>
> 
> >Back to an earlier question, do we support multiple versions of
> >Slony running on the same instance? If so, and we want to keep that
> >capability, we might need to do some hacks to ensure that the .so's
> >don't step on each other.
> 
> Today you can have multiple versions of slony running on the same
> instance in different slony clusters. Ie you can have _slonyschema1
> and _slonyschema2 both running on the same database with different
> versions of slony.

Is this an important capability in practice?

> The .so has the version number in the filename and for the C symbols we
> encode the version number as part of the symbol name.

It might be possible to do this inside the current framework by adding
a new EXTENSION each version and having its upgrade path include the
removal of the previous .so.  It could be pretty fiddly, though.

Best,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate