Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Upgrading rant.

From: mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Upgrading rant.
Date: 2003-01-03 13:45:13
Message-ID: 3E1593E9.4030502@mohawksoft.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

>  
>
>Well, this is exactly the issue: someone would have to put substantial
>amounts of time into update mechanisms and/or maintenance of obsolete
>versions, as opposed to features, performance improvements, or bug
>fixes.
>
>Personally, I feel that if we weren't working as hard as we could on
>features/performance/bugfixes, the upgrade issue would be moot because
>there wouldn't *be* any reason to upgrade.  So I'm not planning to
>redirect my priorities.  But this is an open source project and every
>developer gets to set their own priorities.  If you can persuade someone
>to put their time into that, go for it.
>
Do not under estimate the upgrade issue. I think it is huge and a LOT of 
people have problems with it. Personally, I never understood why the 
dump/restore needed to happen in the first place.

Can't the data and index file format be more rigidly defined and stuck 
too? Can't there just be some BKI process to add new data entries? I had 
the same issues with 7.1 and 7.2,


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2003-01-03 15:24:11
Subject: Threads
Previous:From: D'Arcy J.M. CainDate: 2003-01-03 13:05:55
Subject: Re: python interface

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group