Re: Upgrading a database dump/restore
От | Guido Barosio |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Upgrading a database dump/restore |
Дата | |
Msg-id | f7f6b4c70610051833k65a1829v6767c82b1875d30a@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Upgrading a database dump/restore (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Well, there is a TODO item ( somewhere only we know ...). Administration * Allow major upgrades without dump/reload, perhaps using pg_upgrade http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgtodo?pg_upgrade pg_upgrade resists itself to be born, but that discussion seems to seed *certain* fundamentals for a future upgrade tool. It reached pgfoundry, at least the name :) g.- On 10/5/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Mark Woodward" <pgsql@mohawksoft.com> writes: > > Not to cause any arguments, but this is sort a standard discussion that > > gets brought up periodically and I was wondering if there has been any > > "softening" of the attitudes against an "in place" upgrade, or movement to > > not having to dump and restore for upgrades. > > Whenever someone actually writes a pg_upgrade, we'll institute a policy > to restrict changes it can't handle. But until we have a credible > upgrade tool it's pointless to make any such restriction. ("Credible" > means "able to handle system catalog restructurings", IMHO --- without > that, you'd not have any improvement over the current rules for minor > releases.) > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > -- Guido Barosio ----------------------- http://www.globant.com guido.barosio@globant.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: