Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro

From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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: 2025-11-19 22:03:59
Message-ID: 202511192201.3wvvrchnvyfb@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2025-Nov-19, Robert Haas wrote:

> I do not know how to make the phrase "older minor releases" any more
> clear.

It's perfectly clear. I just don't believe this claim.

> You and Álvaro seem to be under the impression that nobody will
> ever try to compile code written after this change from a point
> release that we shipped before this change. While I don't think that
> will be a common thing to do, I'm not sure where you get the idea that
> older minor releases completely cease to be relevant when we release a
> new one. That's just not how it works.

I'm sure compiled versions continue to be relevant, but I highly doubt
anybody compiles afresh with old minors.

> I bet if we look in a few years we'll find modules on PGXN that have
> #ifdef logic in them to make sure they can work with both
> XLogRecPtrIsInvalid and XLogRecPtrIsValid.

Ok, let's wait a few years and see. My bet is you won't find any.

--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2025-11-19 22:12:49 Re: Checkpointer write combining
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-11-19 22:00:31 Re: 10% drop in code line count in PG 17