Re: pg_trgm comparison bug on cross-architecture replication due to different char implementation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 2:07 PM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:48:29AM -0800, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > Thank you for reviewing the patches. I've fixed these issues and
> > attached the updated patches.
>
> Looks good.
>
> > I have one question about the 0001 patch; since we add
> > 'default_char_signedness' field to ControlFileData do we need to bump
> > PG_CONTROL_VERSION? We have comments about bumping PG_CONTROL_VERSION
> > when changing CheckPoint struct or DBState enum so it seems likely but
> > I'd like to confirm just in case that we need to bump
> > PG_CONTROL_VERSION also when changing ControlFileData.
>
> Yes.  (I'm not aware of value we get from having distinct control file version
> and catalog version, but we do have both.)
>
> > If we need, can
> > we bump it to 1800? or 1701?
>
> I'd do 1800.  The pattern seems to be to bump to 1800 for the first pg_control
> change of the v18 cycle, then 1801, then 1802 for the third change of the
> cycle.  That's based on this history:
>
> git log -U0 -p src/include/catalog/pg_control.h | grep -E '^(Date|\+#define PG_CONTROL_VERSION)'

Thank you for the confirmation. That makes sense to me.

I'll push these patches with version bumps, barring any objections or
further comments.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com