Re: Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not?

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not?
Date: 2005-10-07 15:35:52
Message-ID: 200510071135.52058.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Friday 07 October 2005 03:50, Dave Page wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> > Sent: 07 October 2005 02:28
> > To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > Subject: [HACKERS] Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not?
> >
> > 2. Revert the result type of pg_cancel_backend() to int, but
> > leave the
> > rest as-is (minimum change to avoid a compatibility break
> > with 8.0).
>
> +1 (I do know people who will need to modify scripts because of this
> change), though I'm obviously not going to win having already scanned
> the entire thread :-)

I'm sympathetic to this, but doesn't it seem worse to have this one function
return int if all the others return boolean? Also they don't need to modify
scripts, can't they just write thier own pg_cacnel_backend to return int
based on the boolean version?

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2005-10-07 15:46:56 Re: Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-10-07 14:52:31 Re: [HACKERS] Patching dblink.c to avoid warning about open