Re: [pgsql-hackers] Daily digest v1.4918 (23 messages)

> On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 18:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I have already
>> suggested to core that we should insist on 8.1 not requiring an initdb,
>> so as to ensure that people will migrate up to it easily from 8.0.

> So is it firm policy that changes that require a catversion update
> cannot be made during the 8.1 cycle?

Not yet --- I suggested it but didn't get any yeas or nays. I don't
feel this is solely core's decision anyway ... what do the assembled
hackers think?

>> (Needless to say, it would be good to get this sorted out early on in
>> the 8.1 development cycle, to avoid the need to revert patches at some
>> point down the line. For those of us working on large projects that
>> will definitely require an initdb, it would also be good to know -- as
>> this policy will likely prevent that work from getting into 8.1)

>Yes, it has to be decided one way or the other soon.

>One way to have our cake and eat it too would be for someone to
>resurrect pg_upgrade during this devel cycle. Anyone feel like
>working on that?

Yup. I feel like working on that and not just feel as I been noising
about it in the recent past. In fact I have opend a pgfoundry project for
that exact work.

> regards, tom lane

--
Serguei A. Mokhov | /~\ The ASCII
Computer Science Department | \ / Ribbon Campaign
Concordia University | X Against HTML
Montreal, Quebec, Canada | / \ Email!