On 2014-11-14 00:04:52 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 11/11/2014 06:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >On 2014-11-03 21:58:51 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >>PS. I find the name "ReplicationSlotOnDiskDynamicSize" confusing, as it is > >>in fact a fixed size struct. I gather it's expected that the size of that > >>part might change across versions, but by that definition nothing is > >>constant. > > > >Well, the idea is that the 'constant' part is version independent. The > >part following afterwards (dynamic) can differ based on the 'version' > >struct member. The reason is that that allows files from older releases > >to be read after a pg_upgrade. > > > >If you have suggestions for better names. > > (It's a bit late, I know, but...) > > I would actually suggest using the 'magic' field as the version identifier. > Increment it by one on every version change. It would be handy to have the > version ID as the first field in the file.
What's the advantage of that over having a distinct magic field first, and a version field second? That's how it currently is. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
