Re: pgsql: Set the volatility of the timestamptz version of date_bin() back

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 01:56:50PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Sep-03, John Naylor wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:46 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2021-Sep-03, John Naylor wrote:
> > > These catversion bumps in branch 14 this late in the cycle seem suspect.
> > > Didn't we have some hesitation to push multirange unnest around beta2
> > > precisely because of a desire to avoid catversion bumps?
> >
> > This was for correcting a mistake (although the first commit turned out to
> > be a mistake itself), so I understood it to be necessary.
>
> A crazy idea might have been to return to the original value.

+1. I think the catversion usually is always increased even in a "revert", but
in this exceptional case [0] it would be nice if beta4/rc1 had the same number
as b3.

[0] two commits close to each other, with no other catalog changes, and with
the specific goal of allowing trivial upgrade from b3.

--
Justin