Re: PQnotifies() in 7.3 broken?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com>, Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk>
Subject: Re: PQnotifies() in 7.3 broken?
Date: 2002-12-16 16:01:00
Message-ID: 200212161601.gBGG10U01751@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> >> Do I need to increment the other interfaces that
> >> _use_ libpq, like ecpg?
>
> > If and only if the libpq API is part of their documented API. For ecpg I
> > think this is not the case, but for libpq++ it would seem to be the case.
>
> However, an app linked against libpq++ would also be linked against
> libpq, and so the incompatibility will be flagged by the linker anyway.
> I can see no need to bump libpq++'s own number.

New question --- didn't we change the externally visible PGNotify
structure in libpq-fe.h in 7.3, and as returned by PQnotifies:

PGnotify *
PQnotifies(PGconn *conn)

meaning if ecpg references PGnotify, should it have a new major number
too, so actually, we did change the API in 7.3 and not just the binary
compatibility.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-12-16 16:12:31 Re: PQnotifies() in 7.3 broken?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-12-16 15:51:46 Re: Big 7.4 items