Re: API stability [was: pgsql: Fix possible recovery trouble if TRUNCATE overlaps a checkpoint.]

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Markus Wanner <markus.wanner@enterprisedb.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Date: 2022-04-05T14:32:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:17 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Renaming it would constitute an API break, which is if anything worse
>> than an ABI break.

> I don't think so, because an API break will cause a compilation
> failure, which an extension author can easily fix.

My point is that we want that to happen in HEAD, but it's not okay
for it to happen in a minor release of a stable branch.

			regards, tom lane



Commits

  1. Rethink the delay-checkpoint-end mechanism in the back-branches.

  2. Rename delayChkpt to delayChkptFlags.

  3. Fix possible recovery trouble if TRUNCATE overlaps a checkpoint.