Tom Lane wrote:
> So, yes, if an old client has a dynamically linked libpq.so then
> replacing the .so would bring that client into sync with a nonstandard
Of course, with the server and client on the same machine, the server
and the client dynamic libs are very likely to follow the same
'non-standard' as the libpq.so is likely to be from the same build or
package as the server is.
> However, the pitfalls should be obvious: independently built
> clients, statically linked libraries, differing .so version numbers
> to name three risk areas.
These are real risks, of course. I have personal experience with the
statically linked client and differing so version number cases.
And, yes, to echo your previous sentiment, if it breaks, the
distributor/packager is not the one that gets the compliants -- the
PostgreSQL community does.
So, for future discussion, a compromise will have to be arranged -- but
this really isn't a 7.1 issue, as this isn't a 'bugfix' per se -- you
have fixed the immediate problem. But this is something to consider for
7.2 or later, as priorities are shuffled.
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Franck Martin||Date: 2001-01-28 23:05:40|
|Subject: Development of ISO19100 support in PG|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2001-01-28 22:59:42|
|Subject: Re: Re: Sure enough, the lock file is gone |