From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: A Modest Upgrade Proposal |
Date: | 2016-05-17 01:28:23 |
Message-ID: | 573A73B7.8020805@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/16/2016 06:22 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
>
>> As a relatively (to our users) minor course correction, I would like
>> to propose the following:
>
>> - Develop a logical upgrade path as a part of the (Yay! Sexy!) logical
>> replication that's already in large part built.
>>
>> This path would, of course, run either locally or across a network,
>> and be testable in both cases.
>
> This is one use case that pglogical intends to fulfill. If you're able
> to contribute to that project, I'm sure many would appreciate it. Right
> now the hottest question seems to be: is this something that should be
> an extension, or should it be part of core with its own set of DDL etc?
> The current patch is geared towards the former, so if the community at
> large prefers to have it as the latter and would oppose the former, now
> is the time to speak up so that the course can be corrected.
Alvaro,
Thank you for bringing this to light. Is there a contributor FAQ for
PgLogical so that people can help?
Sincerely,
jD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-05-17 01:32:41 | Re: A Modest Upgrade Proposal |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-05-17 01:22:45 | Re: A Modest Upgrade Proposal |