From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>
cc: "Daniel Westermann (DWE)" <daniel.westermann@dbi-services.com>,
        "pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Can we still dump version 7?
In-reply-to: <d4a59efe-8e92-a9ec-d14e-3f7a730fdb31@postgresql.org>
References: 
 <GV0P278MB041917EB3E2FE8704B5AE2C6D2DC9@GV0P278MB0419.CHEP278.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <177993.1654008944@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <d4a59efe-8e92-a9ec-d14e-3f7a730fdb31@postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Tue, 31 May 2022 10:57:51 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <201920.1654014069.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 12:21:09 -0400
Message-ID: <201921.1654014069@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/201921.1654014069%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

"Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes:
> On 5/31/22 10:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I wonder whether we should update this or just remove it --- it's
>> clearly something that's likely to get missed again.

> While burdensome, +1 for updating. We don't want users to get caught by 
> surprise if pg_dumpall does not work on an old version when trying to 
> update to a newer version.

Further investigation shows that we've failed to update this twice in
the past six years, and failed to update a similar comment about psql
once.  I fixed 'em, but I have very little hope that they'll stay fixed.

			regards, tom lane