Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> writes: >> Will we have to provide different upgrade scripts for different past >> major versions of PostgreSQL? If so, I would say "9.0" or "8.4" would >> be better names. hstore at least is an example that would need this >> treatment I guess. > > I don't foresee us bothering with that. We will only be trying to > upgrade installations that got to 9.1 legitimately.
Shops that upgrade at each new releases are the exception, not the rule. Very few people will have the luxury of upgrading their production from 9.0 to 9.1, most will jump right from 8.3 or 8.4 straight to 9.1. Don't we want to support them, or I am not understanding your words? > I should also make clear that I intend to start out all the contrib > modules at version 1.0. *NOT* 9.1. These things are going to get > version number bumps only when the contents of their install scripts > change, not whenever the surrounding database changes version. If we > number them at 9.1 to start with, it will just promote confusion. Agreed. But we don't have any sorting, so upgrading from 8.4 to 1.0 is no problem for us. Just apply the hstore:8.4:1.0.sql script. I don't see wrapping back up to 8.4 happening soon enough for us to regret it, we won't ship hstore with upgrade support from 8.4-pre-extensions to 8.4-wrapped, will we? Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
