From: | "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Upgrading a database dump/restore |
Date: | 2006-10-09 16:47:44 |
Message-ID: | 16548.24.91.171.78.1160412464.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Mark,
>
>> No one could expect that this could happen by 8.2, or the release after
>> that, but as a direction for the project, the "directors" of the
>> PostgreSQL project must realize that the dump/restore is becomming like
>> the old locking vacuum problem. It is a *serious* issue for PostgreSQL
>> adoption and arguably a real design flaw.
>
> "directors"? (looks around) Nobody here but us chickens, boss.
>
> If you're really interested in pg_upgrade, you're welcome to help out.
> Gavin
> Sherry, Zdenek, and Jonah Harris are working on it (the last separately,
> darn
> it).
This is the most frustrating thing, I *wan't* to do these things, but I
can't find any companies that are willing to pay me to do it, and having
kids, I don't have the spare time to do it.
I *have* a recommendations system already, but I can't even find the time
to do the NetFlix Prize thing.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-10-09 16:54:00 | Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-10-09 16:47:09 | Re: Upgrading a database dump/restore |