Re: Re: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch - Mailing list pgsql-odbc

From Joseph
Subject Re: Re: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch
Date
Msg-id 00a201c08582$79e18780$d564640a@workstation18
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-odbc
I would like too.

Where can I get the compiled version?
Joseph


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: "The Hermit Hacker" <scrappy@hub.org>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>;
<pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org>; "PostgreSQL-patches"
<pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 3:24 PM
Subject: [ODBC] Re: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch


>
> Applied, with comment about changes need for V3.
>
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > > > I am waiting for someone to comment on this.  Anyone?
> > >
> > > Seems like we need a policy decision: do we want to try to be ODBC v2
or
> > > v3?  I don't know what else we might have to change if we want to be
> > > v3-compliant, so that seems like a risky way to proceed right before
> > > a release ...
> >
> > Are we breaking anything by losing the v3-compliancy at this point?  The
> > patch is small, so should be brain-dead to reverse at a later date *if*
we
> > aren't breaking anything by applying it now ...
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>   Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
>   pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
>   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
>   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
>
>



pgsql-odbc by date:

Previous
From: Dave Page
Date:
Subject: RE: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Re: Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch