From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Vera Gangeskar Johne <vjohne(at)salesforce(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump is not backwards compatible in PG12 |
Date: | 2020-02-12 19:49:27 |
Message-ID: | 10870.1581536967@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Vera Gangeskar Johne <vjohne(at)salesforce(dot)com> writes:
> PG 12 bumped the pg_backup_archiver version to 1.14, however this version
> is not supported in past versions of pg_backup_archiver, resulting in
> restores to earlier versions not working.
Yup. Use a newer version of pg_restore.
> 1. Is it expected that pg_dump will produce backwards incompatible dumps?
It's happened before, and it will happen again, no doubt.
> 2. The release notes don't mention this at all as far as I could see.
> Should they?
Possibly. In practice, backwards-incompatibility of the SQL contained
in the dump is a bigger issue most of the time than the dump file format
proper, and there are issues of that sort in almost every major release.
> 3. Should this be a bug?
No. It's impractical to freeze that file format, because we keep adding
new things that pg_dump has to deal with (as the version history you found
shows). Maybe it could've been designed to be more extension-friendly,
but such a redesign would itself be backwards-incompatible.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2020-02-13 04:31:50 | Re: ERROR: subtransaction logged without previous top-level txn record |
Previous Message | Vera Gangeskar Johne | 2020-02-12 18:59:56 | pg_dump is not backwards compatible in PG12 |