Re: pg_upgrade docs
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade docs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 201005250335.o4P3ZXP00462@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade docs (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_upgrade docs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > What is your point? > > My point is that I think Stefan has a good point when he says this: > > >> >> >> hmm that seems better thanks, however I just noticed that we don't have > >> >> >> a "general limitations" section. The way the docs are now done suggests > >> >> >> that there are not limitations at all (except for the two warnings in > >> >> >> the migration guide). Is pg_upgrade really up to the point where it can > >> >> >> fully replace pg_dump & pg_restore independent of the loaded (contrib) > >> >> >> or even third party modules(like postgis or custom datatypes etc)? > > I think he is quite right to be concerned about these issues and if > the limitations in this area are not well-documented so that users can > easily be aware of them, then IMHO that is something we should > correct. Have you read the docs? It does mention the issue with /contrib and stuff. How do I document a limitation I don't know about? This is all very vague. Please suggest some wording. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: