| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: dfmgr additional ABI version fields |
| Date: | 2021-10-08 14:54:45 |
| Message-ID: | 8f2034ca-7677-77cb-38f0-497f92f58fa0@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 07.10.21 21:15, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> writes:
>> On 10/07/21 12:42, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Can we make the addition be a string not a number, so that we
>>> could include something more useful than "1234" in the error
>>> message?
>
>> Just using a string like "EDB v" + something would probably rule out
>> collisions in practice. To be more formal about it, something like
>> the tag URI scheme [0] could be recommended.
>
> Hmm. Personally I'm more interested in the string being comprehensible to
> end users than in whether there's any formal rule guaranteeing uniqueness.
> I really doubt that we will have any practical problem with collisions,
> so I'd rather go with something like "EnterpriseDB v1.2.3" than with
> something like "tag:enterprisedb.com,2021:1.2.3".
Yeah, just a string should be fine.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-10-08 15:13:25 | Re: Parallel vacuum workers prevent the oldest xmin from advancing |
| Previous Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2021-10-08 14:12:30 | Re: RFC: compression dictionaries for JSONB |