Re: pgsql: libpq: Grease the protocol by default

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pgsql: libpq: Grease the protocol by default
Date: 2026-02-24 18:13:02
Message-ID: CAOYmi+=6AFrYm5LaPc=ECyLp2uh1-Y8xLA-dRBJE82JLRdiQ5g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 9:18 AM Jacob Champion
<jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> I still need to run a sanity check with the
> other 9.x lines to make sure I've selected the right cutoffs.

The cutoffs don't behave the way I thought they would.

Yesterday, I was about to complain that cluster.major_version was
poorly named -- why call it that if you have to pass it through
GET_MAJOR_VERSION() to get at what you want? -- but it does in fact
contain _only_ the major version information, because that's all that
PG_VERSION tells us. And unfortunately we don't save the result of the
version check for the old postgres binary anywhere.

So pg_upgrade will use max_protocol_version=3.0 with all servers v10
and below, in practice. There's nothing wrong with that behavior, but
I think I should switch to a simple `< 1100` check in the code to
avoid misleading people, unless anyone has a better way that won't
significantly increase the cost of the backport. (I could potentially
follow up with an improvement on HEAD, if the cost-benefit makes
sense, but I'm not sure it does.)

--Jacob

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2026-02-24 18:50:33 Re: pgsql: libpq: Grease the protocol by default
Previous Message Jacob Champion 2026-02-24 17:27:52 Re: pgsql: libpq: Grease the protocol by default

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2026-02-24 18:13:25 Re: index prefetching
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2026-02-24 17:48:17 Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD