Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 11:01:22 -0700
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>,
	Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	Amit Kapila <akapila@postgresql.org>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Remove unused wait events.
Message-ID: <20211025180122.th5rm5mhg766qd2u@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <E1mdOBY-0005j2-QL@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <CA+TgmoYSAsxiHqpyDCzJa2-hYv0Sme7Me1esi6sHG6LbY8KD+w@mail.gmail.com>
 <4047667.1635179918@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoZ2W5Pqq19kzN5K-Boveq0u1v5az7wFJcUhHdZ18aw7_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4050629.1635182306@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <1611CCCC-E0E8-4A74-A95B-80ECCE987145@yesql.se>
 <4052153.1635183584@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4052153.1635183584@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20211025180122.th5rm5mhg766qd2u%40alap3.anarazel.de>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-10-25 13:39:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
> > Since this will cause integer values to have different textual enum value
> > representations in 14 and 15+, do we want to skip two numbers by assigning the
> > next wait event the integer value of WAIT_EVENT_WAL_WRITE incremented by three?
> > Or enum integer reuse not something we guarantee against across major versions?
> 
> We require a recompile across major versions.  I don't see a reason why
> this particular enum needs more stability than any other one.

+1. That'd end up pushing us to be more conservative about defining new wait
events, which I think would be bad tradeoff.