Subject: Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20191104145336.GA23924@alvherre.pgsql>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
 "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>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Organization: 2ndQuadrant
Message-ID: <5e124b1d-bd8f-0659-1088-4952464223bc@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 14:47:37 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20191104145336.GA23924@alvherre.pgsql>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

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.

Users with with hundreds or thousands of servers and various ancient 
maintenance scripts lying around in hard-to-track ways are not going be 
able to get everything upgraded to the latest minors *and* new script 
versions any time soon.  Until they do, they are effectively blocked 
from introducing 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.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services