Perhaps I missed it but why 'Definitely not' ?
If storage is a limiting factor/constraint, then may be worth attempting ... ?


Promita

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:13 PM, James Taylor <james@jamestaylor.org> wrote:
Definitely not. And please keep replies on the list.

-- jt


On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Chebbi Mohamed Amine
<chebbimamine@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes the two instances are of two different versions. So if I understand well
> there is no mean to do it like this ?
> Thanks
>
>
> 2012/9/21 James Taylor <james@jamestaylor.org>
>>
>> If the two different Galaxy instances are different *versions* of
>> Galaxy, this is unlikely to work out well.
>>
>> -- jt
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Chebbi Mohamed Amine
>> <chebbimamine@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello Galaxy-team!
>> >
>> > I installed recently two differents versions of Galaxy and I would like
>> > to
>> > use the same database for the two instances without loosing data
>> > (histories,
>> > workflows etc..).
>> >
>> > Thank you in advance
>> > Amine
>> >
>> > ___________________________________________________________
>> > Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
>> > in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
>> > and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:
>> >
>> >   http://lists.bx.psu.edu/
>
>
___________________________________________________________
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

  http://lists.bx.psu.edu/



--
MSc  Promita  Bose
          404-408-9060