Re: Sigh, we need an initdb

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Sigh, we need an initdb
Date: 2014-06-04 19:50:33
Message-ID: CA+Tgmob_vhfaPLZZH=ACvMpOw1UT2bXXkVA_ifyeDQutX_R74Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I just noticed that we had not one, but two commits in 9.4 that added
> fields to pg_control. And neither one changed PG_CONTROL_VERSION.
> This is inexcusable sloppiness on the part of the committers involved,
> but the question is what do we do now?

I think it would be an awfully good idea to think about what we could
put into the buildfarm, the git repository, or the source tree to get
some automatic notification when somebody screws up this way (or the
xlog header magic, or catversion). The first of those two screw-ups
(by me) was 11 months ago today; it's pretty scary that we're only
just now noticing.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-06-04 19:55:53 Re: recovery testing for beta
Previous Message Andres Freund 2014-06-04 19:45:44 Re: Hide 'Execution time' in EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)