Re: [HACKERS] v10 pg_ctl compatibility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [HACKERS] v10 pg_ctl compatibility
Date
Msg-id 20170926192923.7kx7b7bonxg6qhxf@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] v10 pg_ctl compatibility  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] v10 pg_ctl compatibility  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: [HACKERS] v10 pg_ctl compatibility  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2017-09-26 11:59:42 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> Should the release notes have a compatibility entry about pg_ctl restart,
> being used against a running pre-10 server, no longer being able to detect
> when startup is complete?
> 
> I don't know if cross-version use of pg_ctl restart was ever officially
> supported, but the current behavior is rather confusing (waiting for a long
> time, and then reporting failure, even though it started successfully).

I'm actually tempted to just make pg_ctl verify the right version of
postgres is being used. Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the
use-case for allowing it, and every couple releases have some breakage?

Greetings,

Andres Freund


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Row Level Security Documentation
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?