Re: Schema version management

From: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Schema version management
Date: 2012-05-21 20:30:39
Message-ID: CAAZKuFYpkzRM5XEibmq=pnk7BUNnBOeCVgQt_y4Y5yWuvL=VqQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>> Also, now that I look more carefully, there was a lot of conversation
>> about this patch; it seems like what you are doing now is reporting
>> its successful use, and I did not understand that by reading the
>> abstract of your email.  And, beyond that, do we have a summary of the
>> open questions that prevented it from being committed?
>
> Good idea. Here is an attempt to a summary:

Thank you, that's very informative. I'd like to reiterate one
question, though, which is something like:

"How do you feel that the since-committed directory-output/input
support in pg_dump/pg_restore could or should influence your patch, if
at all?"

It seems like now that there is support for spitting out a bunch of
files in a directory for pg_dump that is now going to be supported for
a long time that a new feature like yours might be more cohesive if it
somehow played with that. I must confess I haven't read the patch in
detail, especially if it has been updated, but back then there was no
multi-file output mode from pg_dump, and now there is one. My naive
understanding is this would be adding a second one as-is, but I wonder
if that is strictly necessary to fulfill the use case.

--
fdr

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2012-05-21 20:37:06 Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2012-05-21 20:30:37 Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?