| From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade |
| Date: | 2001-03-19 07:23:07 |
| Message-ID: | 3AB5B3DB.F0D1A581@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > > Since pg_upgrade will not work for 7.1, should its installation be
> > > prevented and the man page be disabled?
> > Probably. I am not sure it will ever be used again now that we have
> > numeric file names.
> Perhaps we should leave it for 7.1 because people will complain when
> they can not find it. Maybe we can mention this may go away in the next
> release.
If it doesn't work, and will not be made to work, then let's remove it
from the tree. If someone wants to resurrect it, then it is easily
retrieved from the cvs attic. But istm that it is not a bad thing if
people can not find something which will not work ;)
Comments?
- Thomas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-03-19 08:07:35 | Re: Re: pg_upgrade |
| Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2001-03-19 07:06:50 | Re: new version of contrib-intarray |