Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?

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