Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Oct 20, 2025, at 19:07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Agreed, but let's get v18 in shape first.  I imagine the back branches
> will require some effort to fill in the correct reference commits.
> I was expecting we'd commit initial values pointing at the .0 releases
> and then seeing what the ABI checker moans about in each branch …

FWIW they all fail. I pinned them all to the .1 tags for a couple days last month. Results:

curiously, all the back branches failed when comparing to their .1 tags.

* [REL_18_RC1 =>
c70b6db](https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=baza&dt=2025-09-05%2013%3A10%3A34&stg=abi-compliance-check)
* [REL_17_1 =>
6195afb](https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=baza&dt=2025-09-05%2012%3A54%3A38&stg=abi-compliance-check)
* [REL_16_1 =>
21a61b8](https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=baza&dt=2025-09-05%2012%3A37%3A45&stg=abi-compliance-check)
* [REL_15_1 =>
f871fba](https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=baza&dt=2025-09-05%2012%3A21%3A55&stg=abi-compliance-check)
* [REL_14_1 =>
ea65c88](https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=baza&dt=2025-09-05%2012%3A10%3A11&stg=abi-compliance-check)
* [REL_13_1 =>
dbef9cb](https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=baza&dt=2025-09-05%2012%3A00%3A02&stg=abi-compliance-check)

D