Re: Atomic rename feature for Windows.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Victor Spirin <v(dot)spirin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Atomic rename feature for Windows.
Date: 2021-12-13 00:18:18
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:33:17PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> My general approach to platform compatibility is that when we
> break compatibility with old versions of something, we should do so
> because it will bring concrete benefits. If we can plausibly
> drop support for Windows versions that don't have POSIX rename
> semantics, I'm 100% for that. I'm not for dropping support for
> some platform just because it's old.

I'd agree with that. Now, I would also say if we need something that
depends on a newer version of _WIN32_WINNT that proves to be trickier
or even not possible for older versions, there could be an argument
for dropping older versions, even in the back-branches, if the problem
to-be-fixed is bad enough. In short history, we've never had to go
down to that AFAIK, though.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-12-13 01:47:18 Defining (and possibly skipping) useless VACUUM operations
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-12-12 23:57:00 Re: Logical replication error "no record found" /* shouldn't happen */