From: | "Massa, Harald Armin" <chef(at)ghum(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | PGSQL Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: querying the version of libpq |
Date: | 2010-10-05 17:39:36 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikwde-gYqWq3WWdTXUYAfUVvf6RKhy=mVTBr1Lg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
>
>
> > We could add a PQlibpqVersion(), maybe, but it would be many years
> > before client code could rely on that being present.
>
> I think we should.
>
> And in a small way they can already - if they check for it
> dynamically, they'll know if it was 9.1 or newer at least :-) It'll be
> a long time before it's *easy* to use though. But if we don't add it
> now, it'll be even longer...
and an additional argument: Isn't it a wise decision for clients, to allways
use the newset libpq, independent of the server? As younger libpqs happily
connect to older servers AND are supposed to have less bugs.
As libpq is very small, can be statically linked into applications and there
are no license troubles, I can see no argument to use something that is not
brand new... (compared to other databases with 120megabyte clients with
longer licence restrictions than documentations...)
Or am I missing sth?
Harald
--
GHUM GmbH
Harald Armin Massa
Spielberger Straße 49
70435 Stuttgart
0173/9409607
Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 734971
-
persuadere.
et programmare
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alban Hertroys | 2010-10-05 17:45:53 | Re: PG website testing |
Previous Message | Michael Gould | 2010-10-05 17:34:08 | Problem installing 9.0.1 on Windows 7 x64 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-10-05 18:01:25 | Re: leaky views, yet again |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-10-05 17:31:54 | Re: leaky views, yet again |