Re: Potential ABI breakage in upcoming minor releases - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David E. Wheeler
Subject Re: Potential ABI breakage in upcoming minor releases
Date
Msg-id DB4707F5-0805-4D8B-8571-89735AA9321A@justatheory.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Potential ABI breakage in upcoming minor releases  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Nov 15, 2024, at 19:30, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> That text says exactly nothing about what specific code changes to
> make or not make.  I'm not sure offhand where (or if) we have this
> documented, but there's an idea that adding fields at the end of
> a struct is safer ABI-wise than putting them in the middle.  Which
> is true if you can't squeeze them into padding space.  Here, that
> could have been done and probably should have.
>
> The other bit of documentation we probably need is some annotation in
> struct ResultRelInfo saying "do not change the sizeof() this struct
> in back branches, period”.

This sounds like complementary documentation for committers; totally agree the guidance should be written down
somewhere.

D






pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: logical replication: restart_lsn can go backwards (and more), seems broken since 9.4
Next
From: Dmitry Dolgov
Date:
Subject: Re: Improving btree performance through specializing by key shape, take 2