Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Libpq PGRES_COPY_BOTH - version compatibility

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Libpq PGRES_COPY_BOTH - version compatibility
Date: 2011-01-02 12:27:38
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 19:49, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Dec 29, 2010, at 10:14 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>>> We can be held responsible for the packaging decisions if they use
>>> *our* "make install" commands, imho.
>> Yep.
> So, as I see it there are two ways of doing it - install a
> catversion.h file and include it from libpq-fe.h, or modify the
> libpq-fe.h. I still think modifying libpq-fe.h is the better of these
> choices - but either of them would work. But is the catversion value
> really the best interface for the user? This is about libpq
> functionality level, which really has nothing to do with the backend
> catalog, does it?

It doesn't seem to me that a change of this type requires a catversion bump.

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-01-02 12:41:58
Subject: Re: management of large patches
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-01-02 12:26:43
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic foreign table support.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group