Re: libpq: Bump protocol version to version 3.2 at least until the first/second beta

From: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: 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>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: libpq: Bump protocol version to version 3.2 at least until the first/second beta
Date: 2025-11-03 15:41:52
Message-ID: CAGECzQStz3gNDmH6V-2KPWceMyi+gCCrs=m9hnm-kJwm0RbEJA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 at 15:59, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Won't this mean that it'll be harder to performance comparisons between the
> in-development version and other versions? Because there will be negotiation
> before we branch of 19, but not after and not in release branches?

The negotiation does not require a separate roundtrip, only a tiny
additional message sent by the server. So I'm not worried about that
resulting in a measurable perf change. And even if there is one in
some super extreme benchmark, then you can still set
max_protocol_version=3.0 to revert to the regular behaviour.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2025-11-03 15:59:44 Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip
Previous Message Andres Freund 2025-11-03 15:29:09 Re: [PATCH] Fix orphaned backend processes on Windows using Job Objects