Re: 7.1 Release Date
От | g |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 7.1 Release Date |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0009010708510.20650-100000@wuwei.govshops.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 7.1 Release Date (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Tom, I for one appreciate the fact that the developers would rather spend their time working on features! Keep at it, everyone is doing a *great* job. Postgres is a joy to use. I don't really know what all the controversy is over here. Dumping your data before a version upgrade of your database is pretty standard procedure. To the People Who Don't Backup Their Data Before Upgrading: you're playing with fire. Even if you have some application which claims that you don't need to dump your db and back it up, you're STILL playing with fire. ----------------------------------------- Water overcomes the stone; Without substance it requires no opening; This is the benefit of taking no action. Lao-Tse Brian Knox Senior Systems Engineer brian@govshops.com On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Tom Lane wrote: > teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=) writes: > > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > >> You can always stick to Postgres 6.5 :-). There are certain features > >> that just cannot be added without redoing the on-disk table format. > >> I don't think we will ever want to promise "no more dump/reload"; > >> if we do, it will mean that Postgres has stopped improving. > > > Not necesarrily - one could either design a on disk format with room > > for expansion or create migration tools to add new fields. > > "Room for expansion" isn't necessarily the issue --- sometimes you > just have to fix wrong decisions. The table-file-naming business is > a perfect example. > > Migration tools might ease the pain, sure (though I'd still recommend > doing a full backup before a major version upgrade, just on safety > grounds; so the savings afforded by a tool might not be all that much). > > Up to now, the attitude of the developer community has mostly been > that our TODO list is a mile long and we'd rather spend our limited > time on bug fixes and new features than on migration tools --- both > because it seemed like the right set of priorities for the project, > and because fixes/features are fun while tools are just work ;-). > But perhaps that is an area where Great Bridge and PostgreSQL Inc can > make some contributions using support-contract funding. > > regards, tom lane >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: