From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not? |
Date: | 2005-10-07 16:06:41 |
Message-ID: | 200510071606.j97G6fw06603@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> >> 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?
>
> > No, because you can't overload based purely on return type. I suppose
> > they could write it to take an int8 pid or something, but that's a hack.
>
> Well, how many people want to vote for Andreas' suggestion of having
> both
>
> int pg_cancel_backend(int)
> bool pg_backend_cancel(int)
>
> with the former deprecated but still there for backward compatibility?
-1, too confusing. We have always been willing to modify API's,
especially for admin stuff, as we add features. If we keep everything
around, we end up like Oracle. That has VARCHAR2 written all over it. :-)
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-10-07 16:08:29 | Re: Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-10-07 16:05:16 | Re: [HACKERS] Patching dblink.c to avoid warning about open |