Horton

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

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

View thread View on postgr.es
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: 2022-04-05T19:16:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:32 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> 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.

> I understand, but I am not sure that I agree. I think that if an
> extension stops compiling against a back-branch, someone will notice
> the next time they try to compile it and will fix it. Maybe that's not
> amazing, but I don't think it's a huge deal either.

Well, perhaps it's not the end of the world, but it's still a large
PITA for the maintainer of such an extension.  They can't "just fix it"
because some percentage of their userbase will still need to compile
against older minor releases.  Nor have you provided any way to handle
that requirement via conditional compilation.

			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.