On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 03:57:01PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:56:25PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > >> > I agreed on ripping out the converter plugin ability of pg_upgrade. > > >> > Remember pg_upgrade was originally written by EnterpriseDB staff, and I > > >> > think they expected their closed-source fork of Postgres might need a > > >> > custom page converter someday, but it never needed one, and at this > > >> > point I think having the code in there is just making things more > > >> > complex. I see _no_ reason for community Postgres to use a plugin > > >> > converter because we are going to need that code for every upgrade from > > >> > pre-9.6 to 9.6+, so why not just hard-code in the functions we need. > > >> > We > > >> > can remove it once 9.5 is end-of-life. > > >> > > > >> > > >> Hm, we should rather remove the source code around PAGE_CONVERSION and > > >> page.c at 9.6? > > > > > > Yes. I can do it if you wish. > > > > I see. I understand that page-converter code would be useful for some > > future cases, but makes thing more complex. > > If we're not going to use it, let's get rid of it right away. There's > no point in having a feature that adds complexity just because we might > find some hypothetical use of it in a not-yet-imagined future.
Agreed. We can always add it later if we need it. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
