Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 1:19 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>> Another thing that seems to have happened here is that catversion ought
>> to have been touched and wasn't.
> Hmm, interesting. I didn't think about bumping catversion because I
> didn't change anything in the catalogs. I did think about changing the
> magic number for the file at one point, but unlike some of our other
> constants, there's no indication that this one is intended to be used
> as a version number. But in retrospect it would have been good to
> change something somewhere. If you want me to bump catversion now, I
> can. If you or someone else wants to do it, that's also fine.
If there's a magic number, then I'd (a) change that and (b) adjust
whatever comments led you to think you shouldn't. Bumping catversion
is a good fallback choice when there's not any more-proximate version
indicator, but here there is.
regards, tom lane