| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Do away with a few backwards compatibility macros |
| Date: | 2023-11-21 05:05:36 |
| Message-ID: | 1425715.1700543136@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 09:46:22AM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I'm fine with this because all of these macros are no-ops for all supported
>> versions of Postgres. Even if an extension is using them today, you'll get
>> the same behavior as before if you remove the uses and rebuild against
>> v12-v16.
> Barring objections, I'll plan on committing this in the next week or so.
No objection here, but should we try to establish some sort of project
policy around this sort of change (ie, removal of backwards-compatibility
support)? "Once it no longer matters for any supported version" sounds
about right to me, but maybe somebody has an argument for thinking about
it differently.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-11-21 05:16:06 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Previous Message | Давыдов Виталий | 2023-11-21 05:04:05 | How to accurately determine when a relation should use local buffers? |