Re: Deprecating, and scheduling removal of, pg_dump's tar format.

From: Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Subject: Re: Deprecating, and scheduling removal of, pg_dump's tar format.
Date: 2018-07-27 03:14:57
Message-ID: D71856B6-A219-4870-8383-1FBA0436415D@thebuild.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> On Jul 26, 2018, at 20:09, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>
> Do you, perhaps, have any insight into why those users are currently
> using the .tar format?

Inertia, in most cases; some of those procedures have been around since 8.1 days. Custom format (or a tar'd parallel dump) would be an undoubtedly superior choice. A long depreciation window would cover a lot of those situations.

--
-- Christophe Pettus
xof(at)thebuild(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2018-07-27 03:16:06 pgbench - very minor bug fix on hash() missing argument
Previous Message Tom Lane 2018-07-27 03:14:45 Re: negative bitmapset member not allowed Error with partition pruning