| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | 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: | 2021-10-25 08:29:19 |
| Message-ID: | 7b39fbd133400a6417855fe6ecdd1f04d6c45a34.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2021-10-22 at 19:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 6:42 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > So my first thought was just to revert 92316a458 and give up on it as
> > a bad idea. However ... does anyone actually still care about being
> > able to dump from such ancient servers?
>
> I think I recently heard about an 8.4 server still out there in the
> wild, but AFAICR it's been a long time since I've heard about anything
> older.
I had a customer with 8.3 in the not too distant past, but that need not
stop the show. If necessary, they can dump with 8.3 and restire that.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-10-25 08:57:49 | Re: pg_receivewal starting position |
| Previous Message | Ronan Dunklau | 2021-10-25 08:24:46 | Re: pg_receivewal starting position |