> On 25 Oct 2021, at 20:01, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2021-10-25 13:39:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@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.
Fair enough, makes sense. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/