| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Improper use about DatumGetInt32 |
| Date: | 2020-12-25 07:45:45 |
| Message-ID: | X+WYqdK3qKzQGquw@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 03:58:22PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I don't know if it's possible to determine (at function execution time)
> that we're running with the old extension version; if so it might
> suffice to throw a warning but still have the SQL function run the same
> C function.
Hmm. You could look after extversion? Usually we just handle that
with compatibility routines.
> If we really think that we ought to differentiate, then we could do what
> pg_stat_statement does, and have a separate C function that's called
> with the obsolete signature (pg_stat_statements_1_8 et al).
With the 1.8 flavor, it is possible to pass down a negative number
and it may not fail depending on the number of blocks of the relation,
so I think that you had better have a compatibility layer if a user
has the new binaries but is still on 1.8. And that's surely a safe
move.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-12-25 07:48:16 | Re: Commit fest manager for 2021-01 |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2020-12-25 07:35:30 | Re: Commit fest manager for 2021-01 |