Re: v12 and pg_restore -f- - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
Date
Msg-id 20191105150739.GA6833@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-Nov-05, Tom Lane wrote:

> Sure, because there wasn't any practical way to provide a transition
> period.  I think that case is entirely not comparable to this one,
> either as to whether a transition period is possible, or as to whether
> the benefits of the change merit forced breakage.

We're not forcing anyone into upgrading.  Older versions continue to
work, and many people still use those.  People who already upgraded
and needed a cross-version scriptable mechanism can already use
"-f/dev/stdout" as Justin documented in this thread's OP.  People
upgrading after next week release set can use "-f-".  People not
upgrading soon can keep their scripts for a while yet.

I think this teapot doesn't need the tempest, and nobody's drowning in
it anyway.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Keep compiler silence (clang 10, implicit conversion from 'long' to 'double' )
Next
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: cost based vacuum (parallel)