Re: Potential ABI breakage in upcoming minor releases

David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com>

From: "David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com>

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

Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Marco Slot <marco.slot@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>

Date: 2024-11-16T00:00:02Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Undo unintentional ABI break in struct ResultRelInfo.
- ee33d58471de 16.6 landed
- 6bfacd368bb4 17.2 landed
- 17db248f318f 15.10 landed
- 099e711b77b8 14.15 landed
For inplace update durability, make heap_update() callers wait.
- 51ff46de29f6 16.5 cited
Fix btmarkpos/btrestrpos array key wraparound bug.
- 3fa81b62e09b 16.1 cited
Fix calculation of which GENERATED columns need to be updated.
- 8cd190e13a22 14.7 cited

On Nov 15, 2024, at 16:13, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> In other words, our current guidelines
> for preserving ABI compatibility actually *created* this disaster,
> because the HEAD change was fine from an ABI standpoint but what
> was done in back branches was not.  So we do need to rethink how
> that's worded.

What bit is mis-worded? The guidance Peter committed[1] says that “PostgreSQL makes an effort to avoid server
ABI breaks in minor releases.” It sounds to me like that effort wasn’t held up in back-branches, the sources for minor releases.

But maybe you had some other guidance in mind?

D

[1]: https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/e54a42a