Catalog vs. user table format (was Re: [GENERAL] State of Beta 2)

[Ron Johnson]

On Sat, 2003-09-20 at 11:17, Tom Lane wrote:
 Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  No, I'm not suggesting no catalog changes ... wait, I might be wording
  this wrong ... there are two changes that right now requires a
  dump/reload, changes to the catalogs and changes to the data structures,
  no?  Or are these effectively inter-related?
 
 Oh, what you're saying is no changes in user table format.  Yeah, we

Whew, we're finally on the same page!

So, some definitions we can agree on?
catalog change: CREATE or ALTER a pg_* table.
on-disk structure, a.k.a. user table format: the way that the
tables/fields are actually stored on disk.

So, a catalog change should *not* require a dump/restore, but an
ODS/UTF change should.

Agreed?

-- 
-
Ron Johnson, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jefferson, LA USA

they love our milk and honey, but preach about another way of living
Merle Haggard, The Fighting Side Of Me


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org

Re: Catalog vs. user table format (was Re: [GENERAL] State of Beta

[Marc G. Fournier]

On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, Ron Johnson wrote:

 On Sat, 2003-09-20 at 11:17, Tom Lane wrote:
  Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   No, I'm not suggesting no catalog changes ... wait, I might be wording
   this wrong ... there are two changes that right now requires a
   dump/reload, changes to the catalogs and changes to the data structures,
   no?  Or are these effectively inter-related?
 
  Oh, what you're saying is no changes in user table format.  Yeah, we

 Whew, we're finally on the same page!

 So, some definitions we can agree on?
 catalog change: CREATE or ALTER a pg_* table.
 on-disk structure, a.k.a. user table format: the way that the
 tables/fields are actually stored on disk.

 So, a catalog change should *not* require a dump/restore, but an
 ODS/UTF change should.

As long as pg_update is updated/tested for this, yes, that is what the
thought is ... but, that still requires someone(s) to step up and work
on/maintain pg_upgrade for this to happen ... all we are agreeing to right
now is implement a policy whereby maintaining pg_upgrade is *possible*,
not one where maintaining pg_upgrade is *done* ...


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend