Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 57237FD5.1090605@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0 (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy]
9.6 -> 10.0
Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 04/29/2016 08:32 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:25:21AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: >> Here's the features I can imagine being worth major backwards >> compatibility breaks: > ... >> 5. Transparent upgrade-in-place (i.e. allowing 10.2 to use 10.1's tables >> without pg_upgrade or other modification). > > Technically, this is exactly what pg_upgrade does. I think what you > really mean is for the backend binary to be able to read the system > tables and WAL files of the old clusters --- something I can't see us > implementing anytime soon. > For the most part, pg_upgrade is good enough. There are exceptions and it does need a more thorough test suite but as a whole, it works. As nice as being able to install 9.6 right on top of 9.5 and have 9.6 magically work, it is certainly not a *requirement* anymore. Sincerely, JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: