Re: Correct documentation for protocol version

From: Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Correct documentation for protocol version
Date: 2025-05-28 22:29:37
Message-ID: CADK3HHLQU9S0rBzKMA6gGQc9tXKrdOBm3JA134+-goB0McLNLg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 10:34, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 at 11:02, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 at 22:57, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > Well this isn't quite true since if you request 3.0 and have invalid
>> options it will return 3.0, which is not the highest supported minor
>> version.
>>
>> Probably good to update this section too then to be similarly correct
>> as your already updated section. Maybe also good to clarify further
>> that the version that the server responds with is the protocol version
>> that will be used during the following communication.
>>
>
> I've updated the wording to specify that the negotiateProtocol message
> will only be sent if the client requests a major version the server
> supports.
> Also added a note saying that this will be the protocol version that will
> be used for the duration of the connectin
>
> I found another place where the docs should be updated. The Changes since
Protocol 2.0

See attached patch

>
>

Attachment Content-Type Size
protocol-7.patch application/octet-stream 1.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2025-05-28 22:44:09 Re: PG 18 release notes draft committed
Previous Message Quan Zongliang 2025-05-28 22:09:00 Re: Standardize the definition of the subtype field of AlterDomainStmt