Re: FE/BE Protocol - Specific version

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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