On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Greg Stark <st...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> We really need to figure out an approach that lets us keep the old >>> datatypes around under a different name while making the original name >>> be the new version of the datatype. That way people can migrate and >>> be up, and deal with the need to rewrite their tables at a later time. > >> I do agree that having to rewrite the whole table isn't really >> "upgrade-in-place". > > It's certainly the case that there is a lot more work to do before > pg_migrator could support everything that we reasonably want to be > able to do in a version update. As I see it, the reason it's getting > revived now is that 8.3->8.4 happens to be an update where most of what > it can't (yet) do isn't necessary. That means we can get it out there, > get the bugs out of the functionality it does have, and most importantly > try to set an expectation that future updates will also have some degree > of update-in-place capability. If we wait till it's perfect then > nothing will ever happen at all in this space.
I agree. I remain doubtful that dumping and reloading the schema is the best way to go, but it's certainly a worthwhile experiment, because (a) I might easily be wrong and (b) we'll hopefully learn some things that will be useful going forward. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
