| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Transactional sequence stuff breaks pg_upgrade |
| Date: | 2017-06-13 17:07:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20170613170759.GF13873@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:14:02AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Also, I think that if we did it that way, it would be significantly
> harder to debug. Right now, if something goes boom, you can look at
> the old and new clusters and figure out what doesn't match, but if
> pg_upgrade renumbered everything, you would no longer be able to do
> that, or at least not easily.
FYI, pg_upgrade is designed to go boom if something doesn't look right
because it can't anticipate what changes might be made to Postgres in
the future.
boom == feature!
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2017-06-13 17:09:11 | Re: WIP: Data at rest encryption |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-06-13 17:05:22 | Re: WIP: Data at rest encryption |