| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta |
| Date: | 2010-05-05 23:44:50 |
| Message-ID: | 201005052344.o45NioB21309@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> So what was the conclusion here? Is pg_migrator going to be in contrib
> for beta2 or 3, after cleaning it up?
Thanks for asking. :-) I can add pg_migrator to contrib by the end of
next week, so it will be in beta2. I will remove 8.4 as a migration
target, which will allow the removal of some C code and documentation
warnings. Unless I hear otherwise, I will start on it in the next few
days. Total work will be < 8 hours, including testing.
One outstanding question is whether we want to rename pg_migrator to
something clearer, like pg_upgrade or pg_binary_upgrade. (pg_upgrade
was the original name for this migration method in the 1998.) I am
slightly concerned that the "migration" word is too associated with
cross-database-product migration. (There are no mentions of
"pg_migrator" in our CVS now, except for an 8.4 release note item
mention when pg_dump --binary-upgrade was added.)
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-05-05 23:45:34 | Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta |
| Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2010-05-05 23:30:49 | Re: Reg: SQL Query for Postgres 8.4.3 |