On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 09:42 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > All I'm suggesting is lumping those things requiring a dump/restore
> > together for major updates.
>
> That's exactly what does happen, if you remember that pgsql is
> numbered major.major.minor.
Perhaps thinking about it like this wil
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Greg Spiegelberg
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Greg Spiegelberg's message of mar ago 31 09:04:18 -0400 2010:
>>> Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented
>>> here.
>>> Will the
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Excerpts from Greg Spiegelberg's message of mar ago 31 09:04:18 -0400 2010:
>> Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented
>> here.
>> Will there ever be a release where a dump-restore is not necessary?
>> Per
Excerpts from Greg Spiegelberg's message of mar ago 31 09:04:18 -0400 2010:
> Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented
> here.
> Will there ever be a release where a dump-restore is not necessary?
> Perhaps, at least, minor releases (e.g. 9.0 to 9.1) will not requ
Probably questions best asked on hackers but I figure many are represented here.
Will there ever be a release where a dump-restore is not necessary?
Perhaps, at least, minor releases (e.g. 9.0 to 9.1) will not require a
dump-restore?
>From 9.0 Release Notes:
E.1.2. Migration to Version 9.0
A dump
