From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: multi-backend psql |
Date: | 2003-10-21 04:08:01 |
Message-ID: | 18256.1066709281@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> It had occurred to me that we could move support for each version of the
> backend into a shared lib.
> eg. libpsql70.so, libpsql71.so, etc.
> Then all we do is load the appropriate lib and call functions in it. To
> support a newer version of postgres, you just need to drop in the latest
> .so or something.
It doesn't strike me that that actually buys you anything, except
perhaps guaranteeing that psql cannot function on shared-lib-less
platforms. The clear facts at the moment are that an older psql
cannot be promised to have full functionality with newer backends.
Saying "well it'll work if you install a newer shared library" does
not buy a thing that I can see --- it's no more effort to install
a whole new psql, is it?
Rod's ideas about pushing psql functionality out to the backend
(via special views etc) could ameliorate the forward-compatibility
problem to some extent. But we usually find ourselves fixing psql
in more places than describe.c for each release, so I'm not convinced
there's a full solution available in that direction either.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-21 04:13:31 | Re: A couple of TODO notes |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-21 04:04:17 | Re: A couple of TODO notes |