Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:07:39 -0300
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
	"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: <20191105150739.GA6833@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <8586.1572965160@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-Nov-05, Tom Lane wrote:

> Sure, because there wasn't any practical way to provide a transition
> period.  I think that case is entirely not comparable to this one,
> either as to whether a transition period is possible, or as to whether
> the benefits of the change merit forced breakage.

We're not forcing anyone into upgrading.  Older versions continue to
work, and many people still use those.  People who already upgraded
and needed a cross-version scriptable mechanism can already use
"-f/dev/stdout" as Justin documented in this thread's OP.  People
upgrading after next week release set can use "-f-".  People not
upgrading soon can keep their scripts for a while yet.

I think this teapot doesn't need the tempest, and nobody's drowning in
it anyway.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services