| From: | Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session |
| Date: | 2023-10-10 14:30:04 |
| Message-ID: | CADK3HHLXnkcxWGGkQTWFnLqDr=Rn4XvkUUzpN6b2gs_pfEHB1A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 10:25, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 4:25 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> > Another thing to consider is that using a GUC for binary formats is a
> > protocol change in a way that client_encoding is not. The existing
> > documentation for the protocol already specifies when binary formats
> > will be used, and a GUC would change that behavior. We absolutely would
> > need to update the documentation, and clients (like psql) really should
> > be updated.
>
> I think the idea of using a new parameterFormat value is a good one.
> Let 0 and 1 continue to mean what they mean, and let clients opt in to
> the new mechanism if they're aware of it.
>
Correct me if I am wrong, but the client has to request this. So I'm not
sure how we would be surprised ?
Dave
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2023-10-10 14:33:50 | Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2023-10-10 14:25:04 | Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session |