From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(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: | 2002-01-11 06:09:55 |
Message-ID: | 200201110609.g0B69tp21112@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > ... I'm just looking at the emails
> > and it gives me the creeps already.
>
> FWIW, I would *never* trust a production database to pg_upgrade in its
> current state; it's untested and can't possibly get enough testing
> before release to be trustable. But if Bruce wants to work on it,
> where's the harm? The discussions I've had with him over the past
> couple days are more than valuable enough for development of a future
> bulletproof pg_upgrade, whether or not the current script ever helps
> anyone.
>
> The only mistake we could make here is to advertise pg_upgrade as
> reliable. Which we will not do.
Some people have large, non-critical databases they want to upgrade to
7.2. I can imagine some people using pg_upgrade for those cases.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jean-Michel POURE | 2002-01-11 07:45:07 | Home Location Registry (HLR) and VLR databases |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-11 06:00:51 | Re: pg_upgrade |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-11 18:36:19 | Re: libpq seed PRNG for SSL support |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-11 06:00:51 | Re: pg_upgrade |