| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal to allow setting cursor options on Portals |
| Date: | 2026-01-14 23:30:14 |
| Message-ID: | 431484.1768433414@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> writes:
> I feel like I've said this many times already, but I really do not
> understand why there's such a hesitation on bumping the minor protocol
> version. Bumping the minor protocol version has zero downsides to me.
I think you have that backwards. The right way to think about it
is that bumping the minor version has zero upside. What we actually
want is for the client and server to agree on what specific optional
features they will use, and we have a design that allows doing that
in a fine-grained, extensible way. We don't need to change the
protocol version number ever again, as long as we use protocol
options correctly.
Having said that, I share Robert's distaste for "silent" protocol
bumps that change the behavior without any negotiation.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2026-01-14 23:35:54 | Re: Checkpointer write combining |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-01-14 23:26:47 | Re: Adding basic NUMA awareness |