Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog
Date: 2016-08-29 15:07:17
Message-ID: 6425.1472483237@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Also as a note to the idea that we make break things for external user
> space; the next version being v10 is the exact time to do that.

Let's please drop this meme that "v10 is a great time to break things".
We don't want this to be any worse than any other major-version upgrade.
If we throw thirty different major incompatibilities in at once, we're
going to be hearing about how painful it was for the next decade, even if
any one of them individually would have been manageable. Or, if we make
the pain factor too high, users will simply not upgrade, and we'll be
faced with demands that we support 9.6 forever.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2016-08-29 15:18:38 Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2016-08-29 15:04:58 Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog