Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes:
> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com>wrote:
>> The problem is that once the beta is in progress (starting tomorrow),
>> the projects tries to avoid changes which require a dump and restore (or
>> pg_upgrade). Since the patch changes the catalog it'd require that.
> It would be pg_upgrade'able though, wouldn't it? Don't we have precedents
> for requiring pg_upgrade during beta? At least that's a smaller problem
> than requiring a complete dump/reload.
pg_upgrade makes the penalty for screwups smaller, but a post-beta1 initdb
is still the result of a screwup. None of the historical examples you
mention were planned in advance of beta.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
