From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, Mankirat Singh <mankiratsingh1315(at)gmail(dot)com>, pg(at)bowt(dot)ie, andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats() |
Date: | 2025-10-20 17:07:04 |
Message-ID: | 334460.1760980024@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Thanks. Here's a new patch set. The v18 patch is just an update to the
> .abi-compliance-history file that Tom committed. The master patch adds
> instructions for generating the file to RELEASE_NOTES.
I'd tend to s/placate/control/, otherwise the proposed wording in the
file looks good. I doubt we really need a script to generate the
file in the first place -- why wouldn't copying another branch's
boilerplate be good enough? If you're set on having a script,
at least make it pre-fill the initial entry. (Using branch HEAD
ought to be good enough for that.)
> I imagine we'll
> want to add .abi-compliance-history files for the back-branches, too
> (except for perhaps v13, which is about to go out of support in a couple
> weeks).
Agreed, but let's get v18 in shape first. I imagine the back branches
will require some effort to fill in the correct reference commits.
I was expecting we'd commit initial values pointing at the .0 releases
and then seeing what the ABI checker moans about in each branch ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-10-20 17:14:09 | Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats() |
Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-10-20 17:04:03 | Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD |