Re: 9.5 release notes

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 9.5 release notes
Date: 2015-06-14 00:56:26
Message-ID: 20150614005626.GA3926@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 08:25:55AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:02:35PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > >     On 06/10/2015 09:50 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >     > Also shall we mention about below in Migrations to 9.5 section
> > >     >
> > >     > "pg_basebackup will not not work in tar mode against 9.4 and older
> > >     servers,
> > >     >  as we have introduced a new protocol option in that mode."
> > >
> > >     AFAIK, pg_basebackup has never worked across versions.  So there's no
> > >     reason for this note.
> > >
> > >
> > > It has. The resulting backup has not been usable cross version, but
> > > pg_basebackup itself has. Though not always, and I'm not sure we've ever
> > > claimed it was supported, but it has worked.
> >
> > So we should still mention it in the release notes?
> >
>
> If it has never lead to usable backup's for cross version backup, then I think
> there is no pressing need to mention it.

Removed.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2015-06-14 01:02:38 Re: 9.5 release notes
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-06-13 23:20:48 Re: 9.5 release notes