Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoZzqW7JfSWAd8QYmtxG1H0h4K5AUvoF7DOorj3iALynow@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The problem here is that that function does not exist in 11beta1.
> Since adding the "incoming" function is certainly going to require
> initdb, we have to be able to dump from the server as it now stands,
> or we'll be cutting existing beta testers adrift.

That would still be less disruptive than ripping the feature out,
which would be cutting those same users adrift, too, unless I'm
missing something.

I have to admit that I think this feature is scary. I'm not sure that
it was adequately reviewed and tested, and I'm worried this may not be
the only problem it causes. But this particular problem, as Andres
says, doesn't seem like anything we can't fix with acceptable risk.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tomas Vondra
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: WAL prefetch
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade