> On 12 Feb 2024, at 21:46, Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 09:39:06PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> On 12 Feb 2024, at 21:32, Bharath Rupireddy >>> <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I happened to notice a typo in pg_rotate_logfile in ipc/signalfuncs.c >>> - the hint message wrongly mentions that pg_logfile_rotate is part of >>> the core; which is actually not. pg_logfile_rotate is an adminpack's >>> 1.0 SQL function dropped in 2.0. The core defines pg_rotate_logfile >>> SQL function instead, so use that. Here's a patch to fix the typo. >> >> Nice catch! This needs to be backpatched all the way down to 12 as that >> function wen't away a long time ago (it was marked as deprecated all the way >> back in 9.1). > > This is a bit strange because, with this patch, the HINT suggests using a > function with the same name as the one it lives in. IIUC this is because > adminpack's pg_logfile_rotate() uses pg_rotate_logfile(), while core's > pg_rotate_logfile() uses pg_rotate_logfile_v2(). I suppose trying to > rename these might be more trouble than it's worth at this point, though...
Yeah, I doubt that's worth the churn. On that note though, we might want to consider just dropping it altogether in v17 (while fixing the incorrect hint in backbranches)? I can't imagine adminpack 1.0 being in heavy use today, and skimming pgAdmin code it seems it's only used in pgAdmin3 and not 4. Maybe it's time to simply drop old code? -- Daniel Gustafsson
