On 2021-10-25 13:39:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes: > > Since this will cause integer values to have different textual enum value > > representations in 14 and 15+, do we want to skip two numbers by assigning > > the > > next wait event the integer value of WAIT_EVENT_WAL_WRITE incremented by > > three? > > Or enum integer reuse not something we guarantee against across major > > versions? > > We require a recompile across major versions. I don't see a reason why > this particular enum needs more stability than any other one.
+1. That'd end up pushing us to be more conservative about defining new wait events, which I think would be bad tradeoff.
