| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Upgrading rant. |
| Date: | 2003-01-04 05:39:37 |
| Message-ID: | 20030104133832.F36192-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> pg_upgrade does work, assuming there are no changes to the index or heap
> file formats. (However, I now need to update it for schemas.) However,
> the last time I worked on it for 7.2, no one was really interested in
> testing it, so it never got done. In fact, there was a bug in the
> handling of clog or wal files, but I didn't find out about it until long
> after 7.2 because no one was using it.
>
> Is pg_upgrade too hard to run? Is no one really interested in it?
I'm interested. I might look into it a bit more this release cycle as it
seems that I don't really have the time for major features like I did last
cycle.
Still looking for something straightforward to work on...
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-01-04 10:27:53 | Re: [GENERAL] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ... |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-01-04 05:33:20 | Re: Threads |