Tom Lane wrote:
> "Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu> writes:
> > As an operations guy, the idea of an upgrade using a random,
> > non-repeatable port selection gives me the hebejeebees.
>
> Yeah, I agree. The latest version of the patch doesn't appear to have
> any random component to it, though --- it just expects the user to
> provide port numbers as switches.
Oh, you wanted pg_upgrade to pick a random port number? I can do that,
but how would it check to see it is unused?
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +