Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe Reply-To: - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe Reply-To:
Date
Msg-id 29240.1395444988@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe Reply-To:  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe Reply-To:  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> On 21 March 2014 20:58, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>> It's not the behavior I would choose for a new product, but I can't see
>> benefits sufficient to overturn previous decisions to keep it.

> Speechless

The key argument for not "fixing" this is that it would break existing
pg_dump files.  That's a pretty hard argument to overcome, unfortunately,
even if you're willing to blow off the possibility that client
applications might contain similar shortcuts.  We still do our best to
read dump files from the 7.0 era (see ConvertTriggerToFK() for one example
of going above and beyond for that); and every so often we do hear of
people trying to get data out of such ancient servers.  So even if you
went and fixed pg_dump tomorrow, it'd probably be ten or fifteen years
before people would let you stop reading dumps from existing versions.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: equalTupleDescs() ignores ccvalid/ccnoinherit
Next
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: Standby server won't start