On 2018-Aug-08, Michael Paquier wrote: > As this introduces a new > field to PGPROC, so back-patching the thing as-is would cause an ABI > breakage. Are folks here fine with the new field added to the bottom of > the structure for the backpatched versions, including v11? I have found > about commit 13752743 which has also added a new field called > isBackgroundWorker in the middle of PGPROC in a released branch, which > looks to me like an ABI breakage...
Unnoticed ABI breaks make my hair stand on end. I suppose if we didn't know about 13752743 earlier, then not much outside code relies on PGPROC, or at least its members after isBackgroundWorker. I wouldn't move it now (I suppose anyone who cared has already adjusted for it), but please do put your new member at the end in backbranches. I'm unsure about pg11 -- is it a backbranch already or not? Since we've released beta3 already, ISTM we should consider it so. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
