| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Numeric 508 datatype |
| Date: | 2005-11-17 16:13:06 |
| Message-ID: | 437CAC12.2040702@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> With Slony and Replicator I don't really see the need for in place
> upgrades.
>
Maintaining a replica is hardly a cost-free exercise.
However, I don't think we can promise never to change the ondisk
representation of data, nor the page layout. Sometimes an inplace
upgrade just won't work, ISTM.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-11-17 16:20:50 | Re: Numeric 508 datatype |
| Previous Message | John McCawley | 2005-11-17 16:08:14 | Re: Performance of a view |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-11-17 16:20:50 | Re: Numeric 508 datatype |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2005-11-17 16:04:32 | Re: 8.0 -> 8.1 dump duplicate key problem? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-11-17 16:20:50 | Re: Numeric 508 datatype |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2005-11-17 16:02:07 | Re: Numeric 508 datatype |