Thread: pgsql: Bumping catversion due to changes to pg_trigger and pg_rewrite.
pgsql: Bumping catversion due to changes to pg_trigger and pg_rewrite.
From
wieck@postgresql.org (Jan Wieck)
Date:
Log Message:
-----------
Bumping catversion due to changes to pg_trigger and pg_rewrite.
BTW, the comment in this file says that we hope we never have more than
10 catversion changes per day, but to even make this possible we should
start counting at zero, shouldn't we?
Jan
Modified Files:
--------------
pgsql/src/include/catalog:
catversion.h (r1.391 -> r1.392)
(http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/include/catalog/catversion.h.diff?r1=1.391&r2=1.392)
Jan Wieck wrote: > BTW, the comment in this file says that we hope we never have more than > 10 catversion changes per day, but to even make this possible we should > start counting at zero, shouldn't we? > The comment says "hopefully we'll never commit ten independent sets of catalog changes on the same day" (not > 10), so the comment isn't wrong. But I guess there wouldn't be any harm at starting at zero... -Neil
On 3/20/2007 12:00 AM, Neil Conway wrote: > Jan Wieck wrote: >> BTW, the comment in this file says that we hope we never have more than >> 10 catversion changes per day, but to even make this possible we should >> start counting at zero, shouldn't we? >> > > The comment says "hopefully we'll never commit ten independent sets of > catalog changes on the same day" (not > 10), so the comment isn't wrong. > But I guess there wouldn't be any harm at starting at zero... Since the entire catversion number is used as an integer, counting 0...9 vs. 1...0 makes quite a difference. And that difference manifests itself >9, not >10. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
On 3/20/2007 12:08 AM, Jan Wieck wrote: > On 3/20/2007 12:00 AM, Neil Conway wrote: >> Jan Wieck wrote: >>> BTW, the comment in this file says that we hope we never have more than >>> 10 catversion changes per day, but to even make this possible we should >>> start counting at zero, shouldn't we? >>> >> >> The comment says "hopefully we'll never commit ten independent sets of >> catalog changes on the same day" (not > 10), so the comment isn't wrong. >> But I guess there wouldn't be any harm at starting at zero... > > Since the entire catversion number is used as an integer, counting 0...9 > vs. 1...0 makes quite a difference. And that difference manifests itself > >9, not >10. Sheesh ... yes, rereading your remark I get it. The comment is correct, because the problem case is "10", no more and no less. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #