Re: Schema version management - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Farina
Subject Re: Schema version management
Date
Msg-id CAAZKuFYpkzRM5XEibmq=pnk7BUNnBOeCVgQt_y4Y5yWuvL=VqQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Schema version management  (Joel Jacobson <joel@trustly.com>)
Responses Re: Schema version management
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Joel Jacobson <joel@trustly.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> wrote:
>> Also, now that I look more carefully, there was a lot of conversation
>> about this patch; it seems like what you are doing now is reporting
>> its successful use, and I did not understand that by reading the
>> abstract of your email.  And, beyond that, do we have a summary of the
>> open questions that prevented it from being committed?
>
> Good idea. Here is an attempt to a summary:

Thank you, that's very informative.  I'd like to reiterate one
question, though, which is something like:

"How do you feel that the since-committed directory-output/input
support in pg_dump/pg_restore could or should influence your patch, if
at all?"

It seems like now that there is support for spitting out a bunch of
files in a directory for pg_dump that is now going to be supported for
a long time that a new feature like yours might be more cohesive if it
somehow played with that.  I must confess I haven't read the patch in
detail, especially if it has been updated, but back then there was no
multi-file output mode from pg_dump, and now there is one.  My naive
understanding is this would be adding a second one as-is, but I wonder
if that is strictly necessary to fulfill the use case.

--
fdr


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?