| From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump locking info |
| Date: | 2010-08-15 14:51:18 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTindN46DCbMs06QKo7pYHi6_us+c_MsvtsQwRg5S@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On 15 August 2010 15:38, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 3:47 AM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 15 August 2010 10:38, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Another thing I noticed, going back to
>>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/backup-file.html , is
>>> that it makes no mention of the fact that file system level backups
>>> are useless if being used to restore in a different major version.
>>> Maybe "There are two restrictions, however, which make this method
>>> impractical, or at least inferior to the pg_dump method" should be
>>> changed to "There are three..." and add the point that
>>> pg_dump/pg_dumpall is mostly immune to such limitations.
>>>
>>
>> In the docs for version 9.0, I think the following from
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/migration.html should be
>> updated to make mention of streaming replication:
>
> But you can't use streaming replication for migration...
>
Hmm... yes, that's referring to migration to a new major version.
Ignore the streaming replication comment.
--
Thom Brown
Registered Linux user: #516935
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-15 19:47:19 | Re: pgbench acronym tps |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2010-08-15 14:38:32 | Re: pg_dump locking info |