Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, david(at)justatheory(dot)com, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats()
Date: 2025-10-17 18:45:12
Message-ID: 1723302.1760726712@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 01:15:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> FWIW, I favor the approach of having an in-tree, per-branch file
>> containing the commit hash of a commit that is the current ABI
>> reference for that branch.

> I'm new to the topic, but IMHO the per-branch file approach is by far the
> best approach. Not only is it much more flexible, but we could even use it
> as a centralized list of ABI breaks for a given branch with justification
> for each. I can't think of any strong advantages of keeping this stuff in
> git metadata. git itself uses a file for blame.ignoreRevsFile...

Good idea. We'd have to allow comments in the file, but that's
probably a good thing anyway.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Philip Alger 2025-10-17 19:07:49 Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement
Previous Message Tom Lane 2025-10-17 18:41:06 Re: Inconsistent Behavior of GROUP BY ROLLUP in v17 vs master