Re: RC1 blocker issues - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: RC1 blocker issues
Date
Msg-id 1077.24.211.165.134.1164406027.squirrel@www.dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RC1 blocker issues  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> * possible rearrangement of pg_stat column order:
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00643.php
>> Should we do this, and if so should we force initdb (via a catversion
>> change)?  I'm currently leaning to the thought that if we change it
>> we should force initdb, else we'll risk having a noticeable user-visible
>> difference between different "8.2" installations.
>
> Actually, on looking closer, we *must* force initdb because this changes
> the expected output for the rules regression test.
>
> So, yea or nay?  I'm working up the patch right now, but will hold off
> applying until I hear some comments.
>

Fixing it later would be nastier, or impossible. I think we should fix it
now. We don't have an absolute promise not to require an initdb during
beta, do we?

cheers

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Simon Riggs"
Date:
Subject: Re: RC1 blocker issues
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Error in from_char() for field 'D'?