Re: PQ versions request message - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From James William Pye
Subject Re: PQ versions request message
Date
Msg-id 1126214878.2425.299.camel@localhost
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PQ versions request message  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 16:27 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Had we had such a facility from the beginning, it would indeed have that
> benefit.  But unless you are going to start out by dropping client-side
> support for all extant server versions, you will not get any such
> benefit; you'll still need retry code.  So I still think this isn't
> really worth the trouble it would take to implement.

The benefit will come when extant server versions become antiquated. AFA
difficulty with the implementation is concerned, I wouldn't bother with
anything except the backend. libpq-fe can wait until said antiquation
occurs, and I imagine the backend work being 40 lines or so, no?

> Also, you keep referring to caching the result on the client side and
> re-using it across multiple connections --- but you can do that now,
> so why is that an argument in favor?

Not so much favor, but, rather, it was to target your complaint about
the two required round-trips involved in connection negotiation with a
version query. I was trying to ease that distaste by showing that if
such ambiguity existed where resolution were necessary, it would/should
only need to be done once(save various exceptions, of course).
-- 
Regards, James William Pye


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Suggestion to simplify installation of external modules
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: initdb profiles