On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 03:57:01PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>>> > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:56:25PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> > >> > I agreed on ripping out the converter plugin ability of pg_upgrade.
>>> > >> > Remember pg_upgrade was originally written by EnterpriseDB staff, and I
>>> > >> > think they expected their closed-source fork of Postgres might need a
>>> > >> > custom page converter someday, but it never needed one, and at this
>>> > >> > point I think having the code in there is just making things more
>>> > >> > complex. I see _no_ reason for community Postgres to use a plugin
>>> > >> > converter because we are going to need that code for every upgrade from
>>> > >> > pre-9.6 to 9.6+, so why not just hard-code in the functions we need. We
>>> > >> > can remove it once 9.5 is end-of-life.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Hm, we should rather remove the source code around PAGE_CONVERSION and
>>> > >> page.c at 9.6?
>>> > >
>>> > > Yes. I can do it if you wish.
>>> >
>>> > I see. I understand that page-converter code would be useful for some
>>> > future cases, but makes thing more complex.
>>>
>>> If we're not going to use it, let's get rid of it right away. There's
>>> no point in having a feature that adds complexity just because we might
>>> find some hypothetical use of it in a not-yet-imagined future.
>>
>> Agreed. We can always add it later if we need it.
>>
>
> Attached patch gets rid of page conversion code.
>
Sorry, previous patch is incorrect..
Fixed version patch attached.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada