Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
>Well, this is exactly the issue: someone would have to put substantial
>amounts of time into update mechanisms and/or maintenance of obsolete
>versions, as opposed to features, performance improvements, or bug
>fixes.
>
>Personally, I feel that if we weren't working as hard as we could on
>features/performance/bugfixes, the upgrade issue would be moot because
>there wouldn't *be* any reason to upgrade. So I'm not planning to
>redirect my priorities. But this is an open source project and every
>developer gets to set their own priorities. If you can persuade someone
>to put their time into that, go for it.
>
Do not under estimate the upgrade issue. I think it is huge and a LOT of
people have problems with it. Personally, I never understood why the
dump/restore needed to happen in the first place.
Can't the data and index file format be more rigidly defined and stuck
too? Can't there just be some BKI process to add new data entries? I had
the same issues with 7.1 and 7.2,
