Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs

On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 7:42 AM Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 at 16:02, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Personally, I'm 100% convinced at this point that we're arguing about
> > the wrong problem. Before, I didn't know for sure whether anyone would
> > be mad if we redefined PQprotocolVersion(), but now I know that there
> > is at least one person who will be, and that's Jacob.
>
> I could be interpreting Jacob his response incorrectly, but my
> understanding is that the type of protocol changes we would actually
> do in this version bump, would determine if he's either mad or happy
> that we redefined PQprotocolVersion.

Yes, but my conclusion is pretty much the same: let's talk about the
protocol changes. If we get to the end and revert the new API because
it's no longer adding anything -- e.g. because we've decided that
minor versions no longer have any compatibility guarantees at all --
so be it.

> > If there's one
> > among regular -hackers posters, there are probably more. Since Jelte
> > doesn't seem to want to produce the patch to add
> > PQminorProtocolVersion(), I suggest that somebody else does that --
> > Jacob, do you want to? -- and we commit that and move on.
>
> Let's call it PQfullProtocolVersion and make it return 30002. I'm fine
> with updating the patch. But I'll be unavailable for the next ~3
> weeks.

Agreed on the name. I've attached a reconfigured version of v15-0003,
with an extension that should hopefully not throw off the cfbot, and a
commit message that should hopefully not misrepresent the discussion
so far?

Thanks,
--Jacob