Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 57057817.2030101@nasby.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On 4/5/16 9:01 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > I was actually trying to give our users credit. Our users know that we > wouldn't break compatibility unless we absolutely saw a reason for it > and that we planned for it. Lastly, that we would show them the respect > they deserve by communicating with them in a way that gives them time to > plan for something like that. FWIW, the users I was thinking of in particular are those folks running databases that are so large it's impractical for them to have more than one copy. Maybe by the time 9.6 goes EOL YottaByte drives will be so cheap that it doesn't matter, but I don't think we should count on that. Also, I disagree with your assertion that we must eventually have a compatibility break. Anything is possible in software, if you're willing to expend the effort on it. ISTR that even just a few years before Bruce wrote pg_upgrade people were saying that wasn't possible either. So the first question needs to be not "When?" but "Should we?" Before that can be answered we need a list of TODO items that would break pg_upgrade as it exists today. Then some thought can be put into what it would take to support an in-place upgrade with those changes. MAYBE it turns out that it's just too much effort and we do need a break, but that needs to be a very well justified decision. -- Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect jim@nasby.net 512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: