Re: Planning incompatibilities for Postgres 10.0

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 03:06:13PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > OK, I have added a section to the TODO list for this:
> > 
> >     Desired changes that would prevent upgrades with pg_upgrade
> >     
> >         32-bit page checksums 
> > 
> > Are there any others?
> 
> I would have each data segment be self-identifying, i.e. have a magic
> number at the beginning of the file and the relation OID, some fork
> identification and the segment number somewhere -- probably the special
> space of the first page.

Is this something we want on the TODO?  I was not clear how to do with
without making the first page format special or wasting space on all the
other pages.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +