| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: unlogged sequences |
| Date: | 2022-04-04 07:20:00 |
| Message-ID: | b3323839-8899-badc-9067-2b2207af4a4f@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04.04.22 01:58, David G. Johnston wrote:
> "Because pg_dump is used to transfer data to newer versions of
> PostgreSQL, the output of pg_dump can be expected to load into
> PostgreSQL server versions newer than pg_dump's version." [1]
>
> That is what I'm getting on about when talking about migrations. So a
> v14 SQL backup produced by a v14 pg_dump restored by a v15 psql.
It has always been the case that if you want the best upgrade
experience, you need to use the pg_dump that is >= server version.
The above quote is a corollary to that we don't want to gratuitously
break SQL syntax compatibility. But I don't think that implies that the
behavior of those commands cannot change at all. Otherwise we could
never add new behavior with new defaults.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-04-04 08:08:34 | Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements |
| Previous Message | Andrei Zubkov | 2022-04-04 06:59:04 | Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements |