From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
Cc: | Bruce Badger <bruce_badger(at)badgerse(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: FE/BE Protocol - Specific version |
Date: | 2003-08-29 13:35:08 |
Message-ID: | 13701.1062164108@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
>> So, being able to stop connections trying to use old protocol versions
>> would be very helpful in this case.
> Wouldn't it be better to have StORE run a select version() after
> connecting?
Well, his point is that old versions of his client code wouldn't know to
do that. However, I don't think that what he's suggesting is a suitable
answer either --- he wants to rely on a chance coincidence, namely that
we're upgrading the FE/BE protocol at the same time that he wants to
make an incompatible application-level change.
What I'd do, if I wanted to lock out old clients from accessing
particular tables, is just rename the tables to something else.
(Or keep using the same names, but put the tables in a schema or
database that old clients won't look in.) The clients wouldn't fail
very gracefully, perhaps, but the protocol-level hack doesn't qualify
as graceful in my book either ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2003-08-29 13:56:45 | Re: bug with constraint dependencies? or bug with |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-08-29 13:23:46 | Re: FE/BE Protocol - Specific version |