| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Always bump PG_CONTROL_VERSION? |
| Date: | 2021-05-12 20:30:27 |
| Message-ID: | 20210512203027.sh6p72zrpmf3ekbr@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-05-12 16:18:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Even if we did change the rule going forward, you'd still need to
> do it properly for existing releases, so I don't see that you're
> going to save anything.
It turns out that the last time a major version didn't have a unique
control file version was 9.5, I assume that's where David is coming
from.
That said, I don't think it's a good practice to use the control file
version as an identifier for the major version. Who knows, it might be
necessary to add an optional new format in a minor version at some point
or such crazyness. And then there's the beta stuff you'd mentioned, etc.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Steele | 2021-05-12 20:42:44 | Re: Always bump PG_CONTROL_VERSION? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-05-12 20:18:16 | Re: Always bump PG_CONTROL_VERSION? |