Re: multi-backend psql

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: multi-backend psql
Date: 2003-10-21 04:08:01
Message-ID: 18256.1066709281@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> It had occurred to me that we could move support for each version of the
> backend into a shared lib.
> eg. libpsql70.so, libpsql71.so, etc.
> Then all we do is load the appropriate lib and call functions in it. To
> support a newer version of postgres, you just need to drop in the latest
> .so or something.

It doesn't strike me that that actually buys you anything, except
perhaps guaranteeing that psql cannot function on shared-lib-less
platforms. The clear facts at the moment are that an older psql
cannot be promised to have full functionality with newer backends.
Saying "well it'll work if you install a newer shared library" does
not buy a thing that I can see --- it's no more effort to install
a whole new psql, is it?

Rod's ideas about pushing psql functionality out to the backend
(via special views etc) could ameliorate the forward-compatibility
problem to some extent. But we usually find ourselves fixing psql
in more places than describe.c for each release, so I'm not convinced
there's a full solution available in that direction either.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-10-21 04:13:31 Re: A couple of TODO notes
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-10-21 04:04:17 Re: A couple of TODO notes