Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> This would be a very fine project for someone to pick up (maybe one of
>> the corporate supporters could sponsor someone to work on it?)
> We looked at it for Greenplum but just couldn't justify putting it near
> the top of the priority list. The work/payoff ratio is terrible.
I agree that doing pgupgrade in full generality is probably not worth
the investment required. However, handling the restricted case where
no changes are needed in user tables or indexes would be considerably
easier, and I think it would be worth doing.
If such a tool were available, I don't think it'd be hard to get
consensus on organizing our releases so that it were applicable more
often than not. We could postpone changes that would affect user
table contents until we'd built up a backlog that would all go into
one release. Even a minimal commitment in that line would probably
result in pgupgrade working for at least every other release, and
that would be enough to make it worthwhile if you ask me ...
regards, tom lane