Just weighing in here.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> It doesn't seem worth it
> to try to support parallel restore from nearly-obsolete versions, and
> I suspect that we couldn't do it even if we tried --- the reason the
> representation got changed is that the old way simply didn't work for
> any significant use of the dependency info. Just ignoring the
> dependencies, as your patch effectively proposes, is going to lead to
> restore failures or worse.
Just to clarify, the only part that would not be supported would be
the parallel part, right?
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Jon Erdman||Date: 2010-01-19 18:43:49|
|Subject: Re: BUG #5288: Restoring a 7.4.5 -Fc dump using -j 2 segfaults
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-01-19 18:17:46|
|Subject: Re: BUG #5288: Restoring a 7.4.5 -Fc dump using -j 2 segfaults (patch included) |