Re: WAL & RC1 status

> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Well, I was thinking a few things.  Right now, if we update the
> > catversion.h, we will require a dump/reload.  If we can update just the
> > WAL version stamp, that will allow us to fix WAL format problems without
> > requiring people to dump/reload.
> 
> Since there is not a separate WAL version stamp, introducing one now
> would certainly force an initdb.  I don't mind adding one if you think
> it's useful; another 4 bytes in pg_control won't hurt anything.  But
> it's not going to save anyone's bacon on this cycle.

Having a version number of binary files has saved me many times because
I can add a little 'if' to allow upward binary compatibility without
breaking old binary files.  I think we should have one.

I see our btree files, but I don't see one in heap.  I am going to
recommend that for 7.2.  All our files should have versions just in case
we ever need it.  Some day, we may be able to skip dump/reload for major
versions.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026