Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump versioning

2005-10-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 12:11:49AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > Jim C. Nasby wrote: > >> Watching the discussion about how to handle nextval() and keep it dump > >> compatible makes me wonder: would it be useful to encode database or > >> dump version info into dumps? > > >

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump versioning

2005-10-02 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian writes: > Jim C. Nasby wrote: >> Watching the discussion about how to handle nextval() and keep it dump >> compatible makes me wonder: would it be useful to encode database or >> dump version info into dumps? > If we ever get to a case where we _need_ to use it, it would be good to

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump versioning

2005-10-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jim C. Nasby wrote: > Watching the discussion about how to handle nextval() and keep it dump > compatible makes me wonder: would it be useful to encode database or > dump version info into dumps? ISTM it would make it much more feasible > to handle changes to how things work automatically. Yes, we

[HACKERS] pg_dump versioning

2005-10-02 Thread Jim C. Nasby
Watching the discussion about how to handle nextval() and keep it dump compatible makes me wonder: would it be useful to encode database or dump version info into dumps? ISTM it would make it much more feasible to handle changes to how things work automatically. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Co