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

Re: pg_dump -X

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump -X
Date: 2011-03-18 13:46:38
Message-ID: AANLkTimionrBcW2WSF+jEnvKwozOL4cceiRUOxaiQ5Nv@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Presumably the point of deprecating the feature is that we'd
>>> eventually remove it.  If 4 major releases isn't long enough, what is?
>>
>> Good point.
>
> Unless there are further objections, I think we should go ahead and remove this.
>
> If there ARE further objections, then please say what release you
> think it would be OK to remove it in, or why you think it's worth
> keeping around indefinitely given that the last version in which it
> was documented is now EOL.

Hearing no further objections, I have removed this code.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-03-18 14:10:03
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2011-03-18 13:40:22
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.

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