On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * 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.
Oh. Good point. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
