Tom Lane wrote: > "Joshua D. Drake" <j...@commandprompt.com> writes: > > On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 20:24 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> I think it will be confusing if we change the name, so I vote to not > >> change the name. > > > Actually, I would vote yes to change the name. > > I lean that way too. If there were no history involved, we'd certainly > prefer pg_upgrade to pg_migrator.
Yeah, that was my feeling too. People like "pg_upgrade", or something else? I will add some text like "pg_upgrade (formerly pg_migrator)" in the docs. I will also add something about the fact that there is no guarantee that pg_upgrade will work with all future major Postgres releases, per Tom's concern. FYI, I specifically labeled backend changes as "binary upgrade" because I wanted to make sure those changes were useful for other binary upgrade tools, in case someone wanted to create another one. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
