Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 09:11:32 -0500
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	"imai.yoshikazu@fujitsu.com" <imai.yoshikazu@fujitsu.com>,
	Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>,
	Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>,
	Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
Message-ID: <20191105141132.GK6962@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: <20191104145336.GA23924@alvherre.pgsql>
 <5e124b1d-bd8f-0659-1088-4952464223bc@2ndquadrant.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="u1OyNZeNSCE5dSTH"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5e124b1d-bd8f-0659-1088-4952464223bc@2ndquadrant.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk


--u1OyNZeNSCE5dSTH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Greetings,

* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 2019-11-04 15:53, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >>No, I'm not proposing a full revert.  But there's certainly room to
> >>consider reverting the part that says you*must*  write "-f -" to get
> >>output to stdout.
> >I don't think this will buy us anything, if we get past branches updated
> >promptly.
>=20
> Users with with hundreds or thousands of servers and various ancient
> maintenance scripts lying around in hard-to-track ways are not going be a=
ble
> to get everything upgraded to the latest minors *and* new script versions
> any time soon.  Until they do, they are effectively blocked from introduc=
ing
> PG12 into their environment.  This is very complicated and risky for them.
> I think we should revert the part that requires using -f - at least for
> PG12.

Absolutely not.  This argument could be made, with a great deal more
justification, against the changes to remove recovery.conf, and I'm sure
quite a few other changes that we've made between major versions over
the years, but to do so would be to hamstring our ability to make
progress and to improve PG.

We don't guarantee this kind of compatibility between major versions.
Those users have years to address these kinds of changes, that's why we
have back-branches and support major versions for 5 years.

Thanks,

Stephen

--u1OyNZeNSCE5dSTH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=T6yQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--u1OyNZeNSCE5dSTH--