On 04/29/2016 08:32 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:25:21AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Here's the features I can imagine being worth major backwards
>> compatibility breaks:
> ...
>> 5. Transparent upgrade-in-place (i.e. allowing 10.2 to use 10.1's tables
>> without pg_upgrade or other modification).
>
> Technically, this is exactly what pg_upgrade does. I think what you
> really mean is for the backend binary to be able to read the system
> tables and WAL files of the old clusters --- something I can't see us
> implementing anytime soon.
>
For the most part, pg_upgrade is good enough. There are exceptions and
it does need a more thorough test suite but as a whole, it works. As
nice as being able to install 9.6 right on top of 9.5 and have 9.6
magically work, it is certainly not a *requirement* anymore.
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
