On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > decide to break it when we run into a feature that we really want that
> > can't be had any other way? If we want to make breaking on-disk
> > compatibility something that only happens every 5 years or so, we had
> > better give people - I don't know, a year's notice - so that we can
> > really knock out everything people have any interest in fixing in one
> > release.
>
> Let me come clean and explain that I am worried pg_upgrade has limited
> our ability to make data format changes.
It is nice to see hackers finally realizing that this is true (and
required).
>
> pg_upgrade is much more accepted now than I think anyone expected a year
> ago. Our users are now going to complain if pg_upgrade upgrades are not
> supported in future releases, which eventually is going to cause us
> problems.
"us" being -hackers yes, but it will only help the community.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt
