Re: [HACKERS] Toward pg_upgrade

2005-07-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 18:35 -0700, David Fetter wrote: I'm sure I'm not the first to bring up this way of doing pg_upgrade, but perhaps I can help seed a fruitful discussion on the matter. Ideally, these transformations would be both idempotent and reversible, although I understand that they

Re: [HACKERS] Toward pg_upgrade

2005-07-14 Thread David Fetter
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 02:41:13PM +1000, Neil Conway wrote: David Fetter wrote: As background, I'd like to go over our policy of, The code patch must be accompanied by any doc patches that it implies. Although it is worth noting this policy is not religiously followed anyway (e.g. the

[HACKERS] Toward pg_upgrade

2005-07-13 Thread David Fetter
Folks, I'm sure I'm not the first to bring up this way of doing pg_upgrade, but perhaps I can help seed a fruitful discussion on the matter. As background, I'd like to go over our policy of, The code patch must be accompanied by any doc patches that it implies. I believe that this policy is

Re: [HACKERS] Toward pg_upgrade

2005-07-13 Thread Neil Conway
David Fetter wrote: As background, I'd like to go over our policy of, The code patch must be accompanied by any doc patches that it implies. Although it is worth noting this policy is not religiously followed anyway (e.g. the recent roles patch). I think we basically assume that the person