On 10/6/22 1:10 AM, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Thu, 6 Oct 2022 13:44:43 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in
>> On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 11:24:57PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>>> On 10/5/22 8:44 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> I have two ideas how to fix it. As a design constraint, I'd be interested in
>>>> the RMTs opinion on the following:
>>>> Is a cleaner fix that changes the stats format (i.e. existing stats will be
>>>> thrown away when upgrading) or one that doesn't change the stats format
>>>> preferrable?
>>>
>>> [My opinion, will let Michael/John chime in]
>>>
>>> Ideally we would keep the stats on upgrade -- I think that's the better user
>>> experience.
>>
>> The release has not happened yet, so I would be fine to remain
>> flexible and bump again PGSTAT_FILE_FORMAT_ID so as we have the
>> cleanest approach in place for the release and the future.
Yes, I agree with this.
> At the
>> end, we would throw automatically the data of a file that's marked
>> with a version that does not match with what we expect at load time,
>> so there's a limited impact on the user experience, except, well,
>> losing these stats, of course.
I'm fine with this.
> +1. FWIW, the atttached is an example of what it looks like if we
> avoid file format change.
Thanks for the quick turnaround. I'll let others chime in on the review.
Thanks,
Jonathan