Horton

Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats()

Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Cc: "David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com>, Mankirat Singh <mankiratsingh1315@gmail.com>, pg@bowt.ie, andrew@dunslane.net, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2025-10-31T11:02:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 21.10.25 22:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
>> For the rest of the back-branches, I'm considering starting with a baseline
>> of the latest minor version stamps.  While it would be nice to have a
>> comprehensive history of the ABI compatibility for each major version,
>> we've lived this long without it, and I think it's unlikely that we'd act
>> on any breakages that predate the latest release set.  Thoughts?
> 
> Agreed that building a full list of ABI-changing commits in those
> branches is probably not worth the trouble at this point.  (My OCD
> side kind of wants to do it anyway ... but it's hard to argue that
> we'd get real value out of it, or that we'd change anything now
> unless we get complaints.)

What is the reason that this file is supposed to contain the history of 
relevant changes, rather than just the last one?

If you want the history, you could look at the git log of the file 
itself, no?

Commits

  1. Add commit 24f6c1bd4 to v17 .abi-compliance-history.

  2. Add .abi-compliance-history to back-branches.

  3. Add reminder to create .abi-compliance-history.

  4. Update .abi-compliance-history file.

  5. Add .abi-compliance-history to v18 branch.

  6. Fix thinko in commit 7d129ba54.

  7. Fix lookups in pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats().

  8. Add defenses against unexpected changes in the NodeTag enum list.