Re: For production: 8.4 or 8.3?

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: For production: 8.4 or 8.3?
Date: 2009-07-28 08:57:29
Message-ID: 9837222c0907280157w43c3070ag7e828672c1bcb660@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

2009/7/28 Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>:
> On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 19:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> > I thought they would get around to changing it now.
>>
>> "They" is me, and it's not changing.  I'm not blowing a chance at
>> in-place upgrade to switch the integer-timestamp default.
>
> FWIW, to follow PostgreSQL defaults, I changed PGDG rpms to use it by
> default. I think this will be the first time that we break compatibility
> between RH RPMs and PGDG ones.
>
> It is your playground, but *IMHO* you should not disable a switch that
> is on by PostgreSQL's default.

Personally, I'm still doubtful about using pg_migrator on any large
scale 8.3->8.4 migration. I'm definitely hoping it will be something I
feel safer about when going from 8.4->8.5. In which case it makes a
lot of sense to me to bite the bullet now, and switch to integer
timestamps. That way, the 8.4->8.5 migration will be easier.

If it's ever going to be changed, I doubt it's going to get any
*easier* than doing it right now.

--
Magnus Hagander
Self: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sim Zacks 2009-07-28 09:03:36 count of query results in for loop
Previous Message Devrim GÜNDÜZ 2009-07-28 08:24:47 Re: For production: 8.4 or 8.3?