On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:43:42AM -0700, David G Johnston wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote > > I had to make an exception for temporary tables because pg_upgrade uses > > temporary tables to collect schema information. I tried writing the > > query to use CTEs (second patch), but I would then have to have one > > query for 8.3, which doesn't support CTEs, and another for 8.4+, plus > > the CTE query was more complex than I liked. Another idea would be to > > drop 8.3 support (and remove lots of code to support that), but the > > recent large increase in the number of people upgrading from 8.4 makes > > that unattractive. (8.3 did use a different timestamp storage format > > though.) > > Why not tell people on 8.3- that a direct upgrade is not supported but that > an indirect upgrade to 9.4 or earlier has to be performed first and then > that can be upgraded to 9.5+ ?
Yes, we could easily do that, and trim down pg_upgrade in the process. Are people OK with that? > I'm not clear on how the 8.4 upgrades volume impacts a decision to support > 8.3- upgrades? My point is that people aren't doing upgrades just from 9.1 and 9.2, but often from very old releases. and the end-of-lifed of 8.4 prompted a lot of people to upgrade. Now, since 8.3 has been end-of-lifed since February, 2013, we might be able to argue that 8.3 already had a year to upgrade, so if they now want to upgrade, they have to do it in two steps. Anyway, I think we need more opinions on this. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
