Horton

Re: pgsql: Remove unused wait events.

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <akapila@postgresql.org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-10-25T18:01:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2021-10-25 13:39:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
> > Since this will cause integer values to have different textual enum value
> > representations in 14 and 15+, do we want to skip two numbers by assigning the
> > next wait event the integer value of WAIT_EVENT_WAL_WRITE incremented by three?
> > Or enum integer reuse not something we guarantee against across major versions?
> 
> We require a recompile across major versions.  I don't see a reason why
> this particular enum needs more stability than any other one.

+1. That'd end up pushing us to be more conservative about defining new wait
events, which I think would be bad tradeoff.

Commits

  1. Revert "Remove unused wait events."

  2. Remove unused wait events.

  3. Add support for streaming to built-in logical replication.