On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:20:14AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > It appears to me that f831d4acc required a good deal more adult > supervision than it actually got. That was alleged to be a small > notational refactoring, not a redefinition of what gets put into > dump files.
How much consistent do we need to be for custom dump archives regarding backward and upward-compatibility? For dumps, we give no guarantee that a dump taken with pg_dump on version N will be compatible with a backend at version (N+1), so there is a effort for backward compatibility, not really upward compatibility. It seems to me that f831d4acc should have bumped at least MAKE_ARCHIVE_VERSION as it changes the dump contents, still it seems like a lot of for some refactoring? FWIW, I have gone through the commit's thread and I actually agree that instead of a mix of empty strings and NULL, using only NULL is cleaner. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
