Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
| От | Dave Page |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTinNiwP_hpltx25EnD_fW__idDiRZ6I1jKvpJlQU@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> writes: >> On Jun 3, 2010, at 19:00 , Tom Lane wrote: >>> Maybe we should just get rid of the hint. > >> FYI, Robert Haas suggested the same in the thread that lead to this patch being applied. The arguments against doing thatis that a real crash during recovery *is* something to be quite alarmed about. > > After some discussion among core we're going to leave it as-is. Anybody > who doesn't want to initdb for beta2 can test out pg_upgrade ;-) Shouldn't we have bumped the catversion? The installers can't tell that beta1 clusters won't work with beta2 :-( -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: