On 8 July 2016 at 00:48, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> 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). Why is that? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
