From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump versioning |
Date: | 2005-10-03 03:51:53 |
Message-ID: | 200510030351.j933prd03166@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Watching the discussion about how to handle nextval() and keep it dump
> compatible makes me wonder: would it be useful to encode database or
> dump version info into dumps? ISTM it would make it much more feasible
> to handle changes to how things work automatically.
Yes, we have talked about that, and it would work for pg_dump-generated
dumps. What it might not work for cleanly are dumps moved a different
way, or application changes, so while it might help in some cases, being
able to get things working without the version info is desirable.
If we ever get to a case where we _need_ to use it, it would be good to
have, just in case.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-03 04:11:49 | Re: pg_dump versioning |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-03 03:00:21 | Re: effective SELECT from child tables |