Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EEB2E28AD
	for <pgsql-advocacy-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:59:34 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 52084-10 for
	<pgsql-advocacy-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:59:24 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail42.e.nsc.no (mail42.e.nsc.no [193.213.115.42])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BBBC2E2A35
	for <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:59:23 -0400 (AST)
Received: from [192.168.0.57] (062016190089.customer.alfanett.no
	[62.16.190.89]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by mail42.nsc.no (8.13.8/8.13.5) with ESMTP id lAEExM8r003662
	for <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:59:22 +0100 (MET)
From: "Leif B. Kristensen" <leif@solumslekt.org>
To: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Avoiding upgrade backlash
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:59:21 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7
References: <200711121442.31233.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200711141524.24866.leif@solumslekt.org>
	<200711141545.42878.peter_e@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <200711141545.42878.peter_e@gmx.net>
X-Face: %iea8o"[SI'kMDS.`hz7lU=?\^lC9J-]CVjo;
	f{4-C:$?uVUEjyN~uYFn%*aH_c3d09U>=?utf-8?q?x=0A=09TXtaoj=7EMV=2E8PgG7hik9=3BcCT2N6+u?=@Y{wH\p3*_f~FH9k,Wi74e[_l%.7b^'zJ)8S'^G<(=?utf-8?q?=3D=0A=09zw8=5CPMC3=27=7BKl9=2EzL*ks!b6wA?=,c~'F`k&Vq|ELDGa|4<sl_DHXENz#~X_1qmPq+W;
	1LY2D9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200711141559.21957.leif@solumslekt.org>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200711/89
X-Sequence-Number: 12906

On Wednesday 14. November 2007, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Certainly your statement from the Gentoo forum posting "The 8.2
> pg_dump won't do anything about those implicit casts, but the 8.3
> version will take care of a lot of potential problems with them."
> would be sheer magic and certainly don't correspond to anything
> implemented in pg_dump.

That may not have been explicitly said in the current discussion, but it 
has certainly been my impression that so is the case. My apologies if 
this is an unwarranted assumption.

If somebody would dispel my ignorance and explain _why_ we should use 
the 8.3 pg_dump, I'd be very thankful.
-- 
Leif Biberg Kristensen | Registered Linux User #338009
http://solumslekt.org/ | Cruising with Gentoo/KDE
My Jazz Jukebox: http://www.last.fm/user/leifbk/