Thread: Bump up PG_CONTROL_VERSION on HEAD

Hi all,

f3db7f16 has proved that it can be a bad idea to run pg_resetwal on a
data folder which does not match the version it has been compiled
with.

As of HEAD, PG_CONTROL_VERSION is still 1100:
$ pg_controldata | grep "pg_control version"
pg_control version number:            1100

Wouldn't it be better to bump it up to 1200?

Thanks,
--
Michael

Hi,

On 2019-01-16 11:02:08 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> f3db7f16 has proved that it can be a bad idea to run pg_resetwal on a
> data folder which does not match the version it has been compiled
> with.
> 
> As of HEAD, PG_CONTROL_VERSION is still 1100:
> $ pg_controldata | grep "pg_control version"
> pg_control version number:            1100
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to bump it up to 1200?

We don't commonly bump that without corresponding control version
changes. I don't see what we'd gain by the bump?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-01-16 11:02:08 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> f3db7f16 has proved that it can be a bad idea to run pg_resetwal on a
>> data folder which does not match the version it has been compiled
>> with.
>> 
>> As of HEAD, PG_CONTROL_VERSION is still 1100:
>> $ pg_controldata | grep "pg_control version"
>> pg_control version number:            1100
>> 
>> Wouldn't it be better to bump it up to 1200?

> We don't commonly bump that without corresponding control version
> changes. I don't see what we'd gain by the bump?

Yeah, it has not been our practice to bump PG_CONTROL_VERSION
unless the contents of pg_control actually change.  The whole
point of f3db7f16 was to ensure that we didn't have to do that
just because of a major version change.

            regards, tom lane