* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > One of the things that we frequently recommend when doing > > upgrades is that you do the dump with the newer version's pg_dump, so > > as to get the benefits of any bug fixes that are in it. The more > > dump functionality is on the server side, the less opportunity we have > > to repair things that way. > > But why wouldn't we be able to fix the version in the server, if it > turns out to be buggy? I suppose we wouldn't fix bugs discovered > after EOL, but I'm not sure that's a sufficient objection.
There are other things beyond bugs here.. Changes in reserved keywords
is actually the biggest reason, ime, to use the newer pg_dump when
you're trying to move to a newer PG version. I don't think we'd want to
either go to quoteing everything (yuck), or having a point release
suddenly change what gets quoted and what doesn't in a pg_dump..
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
