Re: truncating pg_multixact/members - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: truncating pg_multixact/members
Date
Msg-id 31820.1392230043@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: truncating pg_multixact/members  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: truncating pg_multixact/members  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> In this new version, I added a couple of fields to VacuumStmt node.  How
> strongly do we feel this would cause an ABI break?  Would we be more
> comfortable if I put them at the end of the struct for 9.3 instead?

In the past we've usually added such members at the end of the struct
in back branches (but put them in the logical place in HEAD).  I'd
recommend doing that just on principle.

> Also, AutoVacOpts (used as part of reloptions) gained three extra
> fields.  Since this is in the middle of StdRdOptions, it'd be somewhat
> more involve to put these at the end of that struct.  This might be a
> problem if somebody has a module calling RelationIsSecurityView().  If
> anyone thinks we should be concerned about such an ABI change, please
> shout quickly.

That sounds problematic --- surely StdRdOptions might be something
extensions are making use of?
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT
Next
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Recovery inconsistencies, standby much larger than primary