Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
Date
Msg-id 87zno1gofs.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>)
Responses Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:

> Personally ... as long as a v8.x client can talk to a v7.x backend, you
> have my vote ... I'm more apt to upgrade my clients before my servers
> anyway ...

Surely that's not true for a production environment. You have one database but
potentially dozens of various programs around that access it. The main
application, some backend scripts for batch jobs, your backup process, your
monitoring systems... Not all of these are necessarily on the same machine.

It's upgrading the database that's likely to be the driving motivation for new
sql or storage features. People usually don't get excited about upgrading the
client libraries :)

--
greg



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: regproc's lack of certainty is dangerous
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL99 ARRAY support proposal