On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> For the most part, we've been very successful in *not* breaking
> backward compatibility and I think we owe a good part of our success
> to that. When we've deviated from that principle (ahem, 8.3) it's
> been very painful, and I can't imagine why we'd want to go through
> that again, unless we just have a masochistic streak.
I agree that we shouldn't go through that again unless we have a very
good reason, which I don't think we do in the case of breaking on-disk
compatibility -- it isn't particularly burdening us. I disagree with
the implication that the 8.3 changes were a bad decision at the time.
--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan
