| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Harry B <harrysungod(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres 11, partitioning with a custom hash function |
| Date: | 2018-10-05 00:39:55 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f9cxW86OwhkgTjUO4DdAYOHUSTzLQQE9EO7r_R=nLoOYw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 5 October 2018 at 09:43, Harry B <harrysungod(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Now the big question: How scared should I be relying on this? I don't mind
> it breaking on major version upgrades (which would mean I need to dump &
> restore my entire set), but how likely is it to change unannounced in a
> minor/security release? Unless of course, you break it in a way that makes
> custom-hash function impossible.
I don't see how we could possibly change it once v11 is out the door.
Such a change would break pg_upgrade and I imagine we want that to
work for a long time to come yet, at least until there is some other
reason that is worthy of breaking it. The bar is likely set pretty
high for that.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-10-05 01:35:39 | Re: We are facing "PANIC: could not read from control file:Success error while starting the database. |
| Previous Message | Harry B | 2018-10-04 20:43:46 | Re: Postgres 11, partitioning with a custom hash function |