On 2026-02-06 Fr 3:29 AM, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 8:19 PM Jakub Wartak
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 6:12 AM Thomas Munro <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 11:04 PM Jakub Wartak
<[email protected]> wrote:
I'm proposing to back-patch 0001. 0002 and 0003 are proposals for master only.
Do you have any plans to commit this before February (before next
minor release) or perhaps do you need some further input or help in
this $thread? (I'm mainly after the XFS thingy, but we kill two birds
with 1 stone here).
Pushed.
Thank You very much !
BTW the rest of the patches will reemerge for master, but for the
minimal one back-patched: crake complains about an ABI break due to
GUC table changes. Of course adding a GUC to the stable branches is
unusual and we discussed the need for it in this case. Is that
expected? In what way is it part of the ABI? How would one determine
in advance that the ABI checker will complain?
First, thanks for committing this.
How to tell it will detect a break is a good question. I guess a trivial
answer would be to run the buildfarm client with the ABICompCheck module
enabled, but that's probably a big ask if you're not set up for it. This
one is relatively hard to catch because tthe ABI change is in a
generated file, so the triggering source change isn't even in the
include directory.
Not sure if we want to start using a suppressions file to exclude
certain symbols from consideration. They are described here
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/libabigail.7.html
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
