Re: PostgreSQL 12, JIT defaults - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PostgreSQL 12, JIT defaults
Date
Msg-id 28382.1539020509@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL 12, JIT defaults  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>> I am thinking so simple number should be good enough. We can require
>> equality - Just I need a signal so some is wrong - better than Postgres
>> crash.

> It'd cause constant conflicts and / or we would regularly forget updating it. It's not that trivial to determine what
influencesABI compatibility. 

There already is a PG major-version-number check embedded in the
PG_MODULE_MAGIC infrastructure, which is plenty for regular users.
It's not sufficient for developers working with HEAD, of course.

We could consider making that work off of catversion instead, but I don't
think it'd really improve matters to do so.  catversion doesn't cover most
of what can break loadable modules, such as changes of Node data
structures.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Laurenz Albe
Date:
Subject: Re: Function to promote standby servers
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 12, JIT defaults