Re: Fixing target-column indirection in INSERT with multiple VALUES

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fixing target-column indirection in INSERT with multiple VALUES
Date: 2016-07-27 22:29:46
Message-ID: 22233.1469658586@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> this would require an initdb because it changes the
>> representation of stored rules for cases like this,

> So pg_upgrade would not work at all for the version this goes into,

No, pg_upgrade wouldn't have a problem. The entire point of pg_upgrade
is to cope with system catalog changes.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-07-27 23:26:41 Re: old_snapshot_threshold allows heap:toast disagreement
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2016-07-27 22:14:18 Re: Fixing target-column indirection in INSERT with multiple VALUES