Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wCVx7-0023jk-0e for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 05:04:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wCVx3-009rIf-0i for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 05:04:42 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wCVx2-009rIX-2v for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 05:04:41 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1wCVwv-00000000uzH-2x2O for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 05:04:35 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 63E54XLM1458884 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 01:04:33 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Do we still need gen_node_support.pl's nodetag ABI stability check? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1458882.1776143073.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2026 01:04:33 -0400 Message-ID: <1458883.1776143073@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk We're still a couple months away from cutting the REL_19_STABLE branch, but I was contemplating that just now, and it occurred to me to wonder whether we still need gen_node_support.pl's single-purpose ABI check (cf commit eea9fa9b2) now that we have buildfarm animals running general-purpose ABI stability checks. On the one hand, there's much to be said for belt-and-suspenders-too safety checks. On the other hand, updating gen_node_support.pl is an extra manual step while creating a branch, so it's easy to forget or get wrong. It's also not very clear why this particular sort of ABI break in a stable branch is any worse than other hazards. I'm not really set either way, but my first thought is to drop the special mechanism. regards, tom lane