Re: unnesting multirange data types

On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 1:20 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 01:00:27AM +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 7:34 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> > > On 2021-Jun-27, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > >
> > > > BTW, I found some small inconsistencies in the declaration of
> > > > multirange operators in the system catalog. Nothing critical, but if
> > > > we decide to bump catversion in beta3, this patch is also nice to
> > > > push.
> > >
> > > Hmm, I think you should push this and not bump catversion. That way,
> > > nobody is forced to initdb if we end up not having a catversion bump for
> > > some other reason; but also anybody who initdb's with beta3 or later
> > > will get the correct descriptions.
> > >
> > > If you don't push it, everybody will have the wrong descriptions.
> >
> > True, but I'm a bit uncomfortable about user instances with different
> > catalogs but the same catversions. On the other hand, initdb's with
> > beta3 or later will be the vast majority among pg14 instances.
> >
> > Did we have similar precedents in the past?
>
> It seems so.
>
> Note in particular 74ab96a45, which adds a new function with no bump.
> Although that one may not be a good precedent to follow, or one that's been
> followed recently.

Justin, thank you very much for the summary.

Given we have similar precedents in the past, I'm going to push the
patch [1] to master and pg14 if no objections.

Links
1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdv9OZEuZDqOQoUKpXhq%3Dmc-qa4gKCPmcgG5Vvesu7%3Ds1w%40mail.gmail.com

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov