| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bump up PG_CONTROL_VERSION on HEAD |
| Date: | 2019-01-16 04:51:40 |
| Message-ID: | 25074.1547614300@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2019-01-16 11:02:08 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> f3db7f16 has proved that it can be a bad idea to run pg_resetwal on a
>> data folder which does not match the version it has been compiled
>> with.
>>
>> As of HEAD, PG_CONTROL_VERSION is still 1100:
>> $ pg_controldata | grep "pg_control version"
>> pg_control version number: 1100
>>
>> Wouldn't it be better to bump it up to 1200?
> We don't commonly bump that without corresponding control version
> changes. I don't see what we'd gain by the bump?
Yeah, it has not been our practice to bump PG_CONTROL_VERSION
unless the contents of pg_control actually change. The whole
point of f3db7f16 was to ensure that we didn't have to do that
just because of a major version change.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2019-01-16 05:20:16 | Re: pgbench doc fix |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-01-16 04:48:13 | Re: Proving IS NOT NULL inference for ScalarArrayOpExpr's |