Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro

From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Quan Zongliang <quanzongliang(at)yeah(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro
Date: 2025-10-31 12:19:50
Message-ID: 202510311047.5wm5fp2t23we@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2025-Oct-31, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:

> After giving it more thought, I'm inclined to postpone the compiler warning
> until XLogRecPtrIsValid() has been available for some time. The question is for
> how long?

Maybe we can mark it so that it becomes obsolete in a future version,

#if PG_VERSION_NUM >= 210000
[[obsolete]]
#endif
XLogRecPtrIsInvalid( .. )

so that people using it today won't get any noise, but once they do get
the warning, the versions without the other macro are already out of
support, so they can switch to the new one easily. (This presupposes
that we'd add the new macro to older branches as well, which shouldn't
be a problem.) Only extensions wishing to support PG versions older
than we support would have to work slightly harder, but that should be OK.

--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"I dream about dreams about dreams", sang the nightingale
under the pale moon (Sandman)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Guo 2025-10-31 12:20:53 Re: apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths and partitionwise join
Previous Message Nazir Bilal Yavuz 2025-10-31 12:13:13 Re: meson vs. llvm bitcode files