Unix Technical Forum

Re: libpq API incompatibility between 7.4 and 8.0

This is a discussion on Re: libpq API incompatibility between 7.4 and 8.0 within the pgsql Hackers forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> > > According to our RELEASE_CHANGES documentation: > > > The major version number should be updated whenever the ...


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > PostgreSQL > pgsql Hackers

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2008, 03:35 AM
Magnus Hagander
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: libpq API incompatibility between 7.4 and 8.0

> > According to our RELEASE_CHANGES documentation:
>
> > The major version number should be updated whenever the

> source of the
> > library changes to make it binary incompatible. Such

> changes include,
> > but are not limited to:

>
> > 1. Removing a public function or structure (or typedef,

> enum, ...)
>
> > 2. Modifying a public functions arguments.

>
> > 3. Removing a field from a public structure.

>
> > so while I don't think we need to update the major number for every
> > PostgreSQL major release, the removal of prog_name probably

> required a
> > major bump.

>
> Well, the point is that get_progname *isn't* a "public" function.
> We never advertised it as a libpq entry point.
>
> What this really brings out to me is that our development
> process doesn't impose a very strong boundary between libpq
> and our bundled client programs. If the client programs were
> enforced to use only the documented public API of libpq then
> we'd not be having this discussion
> --- but stuff such as libpgport support functions tends to
> slip by under the radar. IIRC we've been bitten in exactly
> this way at least once before. What I'm suggesting is that
> we just solve the whole class of problems permanently, by
> abandoning the assumption that we're going to guarantee
> binary compatibility across major releases. I don't think
> that promise is really buying us anything very critical.
>
> If we don't go that way, then we need to have some automatic
> check that none of the client programs are using symbols they
> shouldn't be from libpq. (Hmm ... will the existence of the
> Windows port help here?)


Yes, it will. At least it will refuse to link with references that are
not in the libpqdll.def file. It won't change if the *signature* of the
functions change.

<flashback
href="http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers-win32/2004-10/msg0004
2.php"> ;-) + thread.

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
www.UnixAdminTalk.com