> From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Rebecca Clarke <r.clarke83@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Friday, 7 June 2013, 11:44 > Subject: Re: Function tracking > > Hello > > 2013/6/7 Rebecca Clarke <r.clarke83@xxxxxxxxx>: >> Hi all >> >> I'm looking for suggestions on the best way to track the updates to a >> function. >> >> We have two databases, Dev & Live, so I want to update Live with just > the >> functions that have been modified in the DEV databas3e. >> Is there another, easier way to track the updates than manually recording > it >> in a document? (I'm trying to eliminate human interference). >> > > There is a few tools > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4804779/how-to-check-difference-between-two-databases-in-postgressql > http://pgdiff.sourceforge.net/ > > But I prefer editing files for storing schema and function > definitions. And I use a git. I dislike direct object modifying via > tools like pgAdmin and similar. > I agree, things can get a bit chaotic with everyone using pgAdmin. We do similiar with a set of script files in source control. In addition some sort of automated deployment process helps. My soloution is probably overkill, but we have to deploy over a number of slony nodes in a big two phase commit. I have a controlled deployment process that checks the changes against a small list of things I don't want the devs doing, checks for any errors by testing against a special clone, and then records the actual effects of the changes in the scripts (i.e. drop cascaded etc) before anything is actually deployed. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
