From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Cross-version Compatibility of postgres_fdw |
Date: | 2024-08-13 03:49:17 |
Message-ID: | 1149686.1723520957@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> writes:
> Yes, so I think that adding a note about the required remote server version
> to the cross-version compatibility section would be more intuitive.
> This section already discusses the necessary server versions and limitations.
> Patch attached.
This discussion tickles a concern I've had for awhile: do we really
know that modern postgres_fdw would work with an 8.3 server (never
mind 8.1)? How many of us are in a position to test or debug such
a setup? The discussions we've had around old-version compatibility
for pg_dump and psql seem just as relevant here.
In short, I'm wondering if we should move up the goalposts and only
claim compatibility back to 9.2.
It'd be even better if we had some routine testing to verify that
such cases work. I'm not volunteering to make that happen, though.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Smith | 2024-08-13 03:49:26 | Re: Logical Replication of sequences |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-08-13 03:35:48 | Re: Taking into account syncrep position in flush_lsn reported by apply worker |