Re: pg_upgrade docs
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-05-25T03:35:33Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > What is your point? > > My point is that I think Stefan has a good point when he says this: > > >> >> >> hmm that seems better thanks, however I just noticed that we don't have > >> >> >> a "general limitations" section. The way the docs are now done suggests > >> >> >> that there are not limitations at all (except for the two warnings in > >> >> >> the migration guide). Is pg_upgrade really up to the point where it can > >> >> >> fully replace pg_dump & pg_restore independent of the loaded (contrib) > >> >> >> or even third party modules(like postgis or custom datatypes etc)? > > I think he is quite right to be concerned about these issues and if > the limitations in this area are not well-documented so that users can > easily be aware of them, then IMHO that is something we should > correct. Have you read the docs? It does mention the issue with /contrib and stuff. How do I document a limitation I don't know about? This is all very vague. Please suggest some wording. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com