On 22 May 2012 13:52, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > It seems pretty clear to me that making pg_upgrade responsible for > emptying block zero is a non-starter. But I don't think that's a > reason to throw out the design; I think it's a problem we can work > around.
I like your design better as well *if* you can explain how we can get to it. My proposal was a practical alternative that would allow the idea to proceed. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
