| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Sami Imseih <samimseih(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Naga Appani <nagnrik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com>, torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Catversion bumps during beta (was Re: [Proposal] Expose internal MultiXact member count function for efficient monitoring) |
| Date: | 2026-09-22 17:35:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20260922173506.dd.noahmisch@microsoft.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 07:01:14PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I don't really mind catversion bumps during the beta period in general, I'm
> in the camp that if there's a change that would make the release better and
> it's not particularly risky, it's better to still sneak it in.
>
> I feel I might be in the minority with that view though. Historically, we've
> avoided fixes that need catversion bumps late in the beta period, so that
> beta-testers don't need to pg_upgrade. I think that's a poor tradeoff, but
> if we're changing long-standing policy, the RMT probably isn't the right
> group for that. So, how do others feel?
I personally make no attempt to avoid late catversion bumps.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Previous Message | Nisha Moond | 2026-09-22 17:26:01 | Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication |