Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
Cc: Trond Eivind Glomsrød <teg(at)redhat(dot)com>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Holger Klawitter <holger(at)klawitter(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Date: 2000-10-27 03:11:34
Message-ID: 200010270311.XAA20535@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports

[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Trond Eivind Glomsr?d wrote:
> > > How compatible with 7.0 and 7.1 be from an application standpoint?
> > > Will applications linked with libraries from 7.0 be able to talk to
> > > the 7.1 database? Any changes in library major versions? The other
> > > way?
>
> > Historically, all applications have been able to talk to newer servers,
> > so a 6.4 client can talk to a 7.0 postmaster, and I believe 7.0 clients
> > can talk to 7.1 postmasters.
>
> > We usually do not go the other way, where 6.5 clients can not talk to
> > 6.4 postmasters. I believe 7.0->7.1 will be able to talk in any
> > 7.0.X/7.1 client and server combination.
>
> He's meaning the libpq version for dynamic link loading. Is the
> libpq.so lib changing versions (like the change from 6.5.x to 7.0.x
> changed from libpq.so.2.0 to libpq.so.2.1, which broke binary RPM
> compatibility for other RPM's linked against libpq.so.2.0, which failed
> when libpq.so.2.1 came on the scene). I think the answer is no, but I
> haven't checked the details yet.

I usually up the .so version numbers before entering beta. That way,
they get marked as newer than older versions.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2000-10-27 03:48:56 Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Previous Message Makiko Kudo 2000-10-27 02:05:28 temporary

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-10-27 03:14:14 Re: pgsql/src/backend/nodes (copyfuncs.c outfuncs.c print.c)
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 2000-10-27 03:11:33 Re: pgsql/src/backend/nodes (copyfuncs.c outfuncs.c print.c)

Browse pgsql-ports by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2000-10-27 03:48:56 Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-10-27 00:29:52 Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)