Re: Re: COPY BINARY file format proposal

At 14:28 7/12/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>Next 4 bytes: version number, currently 1 (expressed in source machine's
>endianness

I don't want to continue being picky, but you could just use 4 bytes for a
maj-min-rev-patch version number (in that order), and avoid the endian
issues by reading and writing each byte. No big deal, though.

>This allows for both backwards-compatible header additions (extend the
>header without changing the version number) and non-backwards-compatible
>changes (bump the version number).

That's where the rev & patch levels help if you adopt the above version
numbering - 1.0-** should should all be compatibile, 1.1 should be able to
read <= 1.1-**, 1.0-** should not be expected to read 1.1-** etc.

>
>Comments?
>

Sounds reasonable even without the above suggestions.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/