On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 01:55:13AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]> writes: > > Change timeline field of IDENTIFY_SYSTEM to int8 > > Surely this patch is far from complete?
Yeah.. > But what about whatever code is reading the output? And what if > that code isn't v16? I can't believe that we can make a wire > protocol change as summarily as this. Assuming that one reaches a timeline of 2 billion, this change would make the TLI consumption of the client safe to signedness. But why is it safe to do a protocol change when running IDENTIFY_SYSTEM? We've been very strict to maintain compatibility for any protocol change, hence why should the replication protocol be treated differently? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
