Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22548.1399763328@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>wrote: >> The problem is that once the beta is in progress (starting tomorrow), >> the projects tries to avoid changes which require a dump and restore (or >> pg_upgrade). Since the patch changes the catalog it'd require that. > It would be pg_upgrade'able though, wouldn't it? Don't we have precedents > for requiring pg_upgrade during beta? At least that's a smaller problem > than requiring a complete dump/reload. pg_upgrade makes the penalty for screwups smaller, but a post-beta1 initdb is still the result of a screwup. None of the historical examples you mention were planned in advance of beta. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: