| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Maciek Sakrejda <m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Protocol forced to V2 in low-memory conditions? |
| Date: | 2013-09-10 13:53:15 |
| Message-ID: | 17763.1378821195@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2013-09-10 12:31:22 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> I've been thinking of late that it might be time to retire libpq's
>>> support for V2 protocol (other than in the specific context of the first
>>> error message received while trying to make a connection).
>> It's probably worth polling for that. I believe the jdbc driver at
>> least has code for it, but I don't know if it's a requirement at this
>> point.
> Yes, it has code for it and I think it's still used pretty frequently to
> circumvent prepared statement planning problems (misestimation,
> indeterminate types). So I think we need convincing reasons to break
> their usage.
Note that I was proposing removing libpq's support for V2 connections.
Not the backend's.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2013-09-10 13:55:30 | Re: Protocol forced to V2 in low-memory conditions? |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-09-10 13:48:21 | Re: New statistics for WAL buffer dirty writes |