Robert Haas wrote > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Tom Lane < > tgl@.pa
> > wrote: >> I just noticed that we had not one, but two commits in 9.4 that added >> fields to pg_control. And neither one changed PG_CONTROL_VERSION. >> This is inexcusable sloppiness on the part of the committers involved, >> but the question is what do we do now? > > I think it would be an awfully good idea to think about what we could > put into the buildfarm, the git repository, or the source tree to get > some automatic notification when somebody screws up this way (or the > xlog header magic, or catversion). The first of those two screw-ups > (by me) was 11 months ago today; it's pretty scary that we're only > just now noticing. Not withstanding Tom's comments on the topic a regression test could work here. There was just a recent "leakproof" function discovery that resulted from a regression test that compared all known leakproof functions to those in the current catalog. When the test fails there should be additional instruction - like "Please alter this output file AND bump PG_CONTROL_VERSION!" David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Sigh-we-need-an-initdb-tp5806058p5806071.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
