On 04/29/2016 08:32 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:25:21AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
Here's the features I can imagine being worth major backwards
compatibility breaks:
...
5. Transparent upgrade-in-place (i.e. allowing 10.2 to use 10.1's tables
without pg_upgrade or other modification).


Technically, this is exactly what pg_upgrade does.  I think what you
really mean is for the backend binary to be able to read the system
tables and WAL files of the old clusters --- something I can't see us
implementing anytime soon.


For the most part, pg_upgrade is good enough. There are exceptions and it does need a more thorough test suite but as a whole, it works. As nice as being able to install 9.6 right on top of 9.5 and have 9.6 magically work, it is certainly not a *requirement* anymore.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                        +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to