Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions
Date: 2021-10-24 21:52:00
Message-ID: 202110242152.xea2wxnkwqxd@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2021-Oct-24, Robert Haas wrote:

> You know, one thing we could think about doing is patching some of the
> older branches to make them compile on modern machines. That would not
> only be potentially useful for people who are upgrading from ancient
> versions, but also for hackers trying to do research on the origin of
> bugs or performance problems, and also for people who are trying to
> maintain some kind of backward compatibility or other and want to test
> against old versions.

I think it is worth *some* effort, at least as far back as we want to
claim that we maintain pg_dump and/or psql compatibility, assuming it is
not too onerous. For instance, I wouldn't want to clutter buildfarm or
CI dashboards with testing these branches, unless it is well isolated
from regular ones; we shouldn't commit anything that's too invasive; and
we shouldn't make any claims about supportability of these abandoned
branches.

As an example, I did backpatch one such fix to 8.3 (just over a year)
and 8.2 (four years) after they had closed -- see d13f41d21538 and
105f3ef492ab.

--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Puedes vivir sólo una vez, pero si lo haces bien, una vez es suficiente"

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2021-10-24 22:03:37 Re: Assorted improvements in pg_dump
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-10-24 21:46:17 Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions