On 03/06/10 17:54, Tom Lane wrote:
Because that's the consequences of fooling with pg_control.
I committed the PG_CONTROL_VERSION bump that was missing from
the patch Robert committed last night, but I wonder whether
we shouldn't revert the whole thing instead. It's not apparent
to me that what it bought is worth forcing beta testers to initdb.
Hmph, good point, I did not think of that at all when I reviewed the patch.
If we moved the new DB_SHUTDOWNED_IN_RECOVERY as the last item in the
enum, we would stay backwards-compatible.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
