On Monday 03 August 2009 22:52:55 David Fetter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 09:22:52PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On Monday 03 August 2009 21:07:00 David Fetter wrote: > > > We require that people supply docs with their changes, and it is > > > totally unreasonable to let them send in catalog changes which do > > > not include need migration changes. That's how it works in every > > > other RDBMS outfit that has changes on disk, and we do not need to > > > be the exception. > > > > Well, blocker number one for that is that pg_migrator is not even in > > the PostgreSQL CVS repository, but is more like an endorsed > > third-party product. > > I'm not entirely sure that pg_migrator should be tied to releases of > PostgreSQL, given what it does. Or did you mean that it's not been > given the same scrutiny that the PostgreSQL code base has?
Well, how to you expect to mandate that all patches come with upgrade support if the PostgreSQL software proper does not contain any upgrade support in the first place, because pg_migrator is maintained elsewhere. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
