On 07/07/2016 01:10 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 8:52 PM, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote:
In light of the above, it is perfectly reasonable to require, at least
temporarily, setting up duplicate storage, or another node.
pg_upgrade does that, kinda. I'd like to have something better, but
in the absence of that, I think it's quite wrong to think about
deprecating it, even if we had logical replication fully integrated
into core today. Which we by no means do.
I would much rather see more brain power put into pg_upgrade or in place
upgrades than logical replication (as a upgrade solution).
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
