From: | Phil Thompson <phil(at)river-bank(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Date: | 1998-04-30 18:21:17 |
Message-ID: | 3548C11D.BE04EDC4@river-bank.demon.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Phil Thompson <phil(at)river-bank(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> We should change the protocol version number to 2.0.
> >> It would be possible for the backend to continue to support 1.0 clients,
> >> if you think it's worth the trouble to do so.
>
> > Or 1.1? The changes don't seem too traumatic.
>
> Well, pqcomm.h says that an incompatible change should have a new major
> version number, and minor though these changes be, they *are*
> incompatible.
Err...good point :)
> >> Command Done
> >> Byte1('Z')
>
> > The completion response already does this for successful queries, and
> > the error response for unsuccessful ones.
>
> You missed the point:
I've misunderstood the protocol - and the protocol specification is
therefore wrong (or at least incomplete) in this respect. Do you want
to fix the spec and include your enhancements or shall I?
Phil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Gould | 1998-04-30 18:23:55 | Re: [HACKERS] text patch -- sugg cmd when run as root |
Previous Message | Jose' Soares Da Silva | 1998-04-30 17:43:37 | Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Phil Thompson | 1998-04-30 18:33:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Previous Message | Jose' Soares Da Silva | 1998-04-30 17:43:37 | Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC |