This sounds reasonable. My use case is purely as a document store, with the ability to perform xml parse functions against it – as such, I’m not concerned wether it’s a document or content – hence why we have both types recorded against that field. For the minute, I’m getting around the restore problem by mangling the dump such that the table is created using the text type rather than xml. This at least gets the data onto a 9.3 cluster, even if it’s cosmetically represented as text instead of xml. I can worry about the document vs content problem at a later stage.
Ack. Thanks for the info. I’ll push the upgrade-path agenda a little harder. |