Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?) - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Date
Msg-id 200010270311.XAA20535@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)  (Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>)
List pgsql-general
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Trond Eivind Glomsr?d wrote:
> > > How compatible with 7.0 and 7.1 be from an application standpoint?
> > > Will applications linked with libraries from 7.0 be able to talk to
> > > the 7.1 database?  Any changes in library major versions? The other
> > > way?
>
> > Historically, all applications have been able to talk to newer servers,
> > so a 6.4 client can talk to a 7.0 postmaster, and I believe 7.0 clients
> > can talk to 7.1 postmasters.
>
> > We usually do not go the other way, where 6.5 clients can not talk to
> > 6.4 postmasters.  I believe 7.0->7.1 will be able to talk in any
> > 7.0.X/7.1 client and server combination.
>
> He's meaning the libpq version for dynamic link loading.  Is the
> libpq.so lib changing versions (like the change from 6.5.x to 7.0.x
> changed from libpq.so.2.0 to libpq.so.2.1, which broke binary RPM
> compatibility for other RPM's linked against libpq.so.2.0, which failed
> when libpq.so.2.1 came on the scene).  I think the answer is no, but I
> haven't checked the details yet.

I usually up the .so version numbers before entering beta.  That way,
they get marked as newer than older versions.


--
  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-general by date:

Previous
From: "Oliver Elphick"
Date:
Subject: What is the listserver at hub.org doing?
Next
From: Michael Talbot-Wilson
Date:
Subject: Last value of a key sequence