On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 12:16:35AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, if we didn't want to fix this, a reasonable way to go about
> it would be to bump the archive version number in pg_dump output,
> so that old versions would issue a useful complaint instead of crashing.
> However, I repeat that this patch was sold as a notational improvement,
> not something that was going to break format compatibility. I think if
> anyone had mentioned the latter, there would have been push-back against
> its being committed at all. I am providing such push-back right now,
> because I don't think we should break file compatibility for this.
While I agree that the patch makes handling of the different fields in
archive entries cleaner, I agree as well that this is not enough to
justify a dump version bump.
> I think this patch needs to be worked over so that what it writes
> is exactly what was written before. If the author is unwilling
> to do that PDQ, it should be reverted.
Works for me. With a quick read of the code, it seems to me that it
is possible to keep compatibility while keeping the simplifications
around ArchiveEntry()'s refactoring. Alvaro?
--
Michael
