Message-ID: <4FE73F3F.5040105@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:24:31 +0300
From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:10.0.4) Gecko/20120510 Icedove/10.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
CC: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: WAL format changes
References: <4FDA5136.6080206@enterprisedb.com>
	<201206142358.12431.andres@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CA+TgmobG9VWWvLXeK0XOxoWXtza8JTFgSu2eoAtVFucxH6gLBw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FDF6E8E.4080900@enterprisedb.com>
	<4FE034D0.5070900@enterprisedb.com>
	<CA+TgmoZu=UMKLJDQ5FNRqPnomiGOSdEvzaj_Gg9CJzcPnvuxgQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+TgmoZu=UMKLJDQ5FNRqPnomiGOSdEvzaj_Gg9CJzcPnvuxgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ok, committed all the WAL format changes now.

On 19.06.2012 18:57, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Should we keep the old representation in the replication protocol messages?
>> That would make it simpler to write a client that works with different
>> server versions (like pg_receivexlog). Or, while we're at it, perhaps we
>> should mandate network-byte order for all the integer and XLogRecPtr fields
>> in the replication protocol. That would make it easier to write a client
>> that works across different architectures, in>= 9.3. The contents of the
>> WAL would of course be architecture-dependent, but it would be nice if
>> pg_receivexlog and similar tools could nevertheless be
>> architecture-independent.
>
> I share Andres' question about how we're doing this already.  I think
> if we're going to break this, I'd rather do it in 9.3 than 5 years
> from now.  At this point it's just a minor annoyance, but it'll
> probably get worse as people write more tools that understand WAL.

I didn't touch the replication protocol yet, but I think we should do it 
some time during 9.3.

-- 
   Heikki Linnakangas
   EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com