| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Markus Wanner <markus(dot)wanner(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: API stability [was: pgsql: Fix possible recovery trouble if TRUNCATE overlaps a checkpoint.] |
| Date: | 2022-04-05 19:16:20 |
| Message-ID: | 2661153.1649186180@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:32 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-04-05 19:35:58 | Re: pgsql: JSON_TABLE |
| Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2022-04-05 19:05:38 | Re: pgsql: JSON_TABLE |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-04-05 19:19:10 | Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-04-05 18:59:53 | Re: Improve documentation for pg_upgrade, standbys and rsync |