Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch
Date
Msg-id 14803.940829793@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch  (Mike Mascari <mascarim@yahoo.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Mike Mascari <mascarim@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Does this field exist for all previous postgres releases (specifically,
>> 6.2,6.3, and 6.4) ??

> And of course, it appears also in 6.4.x, so I assume that it was added 
> between the 6.2 and 6.3 releases. Is that going to be a problem?

For Peter's purposes, it's unnecessary to worry about anything older
than 6.4, since he's depending on an up-to-date libpq and current libpq
won't talk to anything older than 6.4.

Byron might still care about 6.2 ... I dunno whether ODBC currently
really works with 6.2 or not, or whether it needs to keep doing so.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mike Mascari
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch