I am about to start committing changes to CVS tip to implement the
planned FE/BE protocol changes.  My plan is to do this a bit at a time,
since I don't want to get far out of sync with CVS.  This means that the
actual protocol supported by CVS tip is going to change little by
little.  Yesterday's libpq may or may not talk to today's server.

To try to keep people from wasting time chasing version-skew problems
while this goes on, I have devised the following plan.  The server and
libpq will claim to speak protocol numbers 3.100, 3.101, 3.102, etc,
changing each time a visible change is committed.  There is also a
temporary hack in postmaster.c that will reject connections from clients
claiming to speak 3.anything-other-than-postmaster's-version.  If you
have an out-of-sync libpq, you will get something like
FATAL: unsupported frontend protocol 3.110: server supports 1.0 to 3.109
or
FATAL: Your development libpq is out of sync with the server

After the dust settles, I'll reset the protocol version number to 3.0
for release.

Note that this should only affect libpq.  Other clients may continue to
speak protocol 2.0 while this is going on, and that should not change.
In emergency you should be able to use a 7.3 copy of libpq.so to talk to
the CVS-tip server.

			regards, tom lane


Thu, 17 Apr 2003 18:23:25 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Note about upcoming instability in FE/BE protocol
On Thu, 2003-04-17 at 23:23, Tom Lane wrote:
> After the dust settles, I'll reset the protocol version number to 3.0
> for release.

And you will need to increment the shared library's major version
number, won't you?  That will be libpq.so.4, so perhaps the final
protocol version should be 4 too.

-- 
Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight, UK                             http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839  932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
                 ========================================
     "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not 
      of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, 
      lest any man should boast."   Ephesians 2:8,9 


18 Apr 2003 06:07:27 +0100
Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
Re: Note about upcoming instability in FE/BE protocol
Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk> writes:
> And you will need to increment the shared library's major version
> number, won't you?

Not unless I break application binary compatibility ...

			regards, tom lane


Fri, 18 Apr 2003 01:49:55 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Note about upcoming instability in FE/BE protocol 
Did you ever get my post about making the BE protocol implemented as a 
shared library?

Tom Lane wrote:

>I am about to start committing changes to CVS tip to implement the
>planned FE/BE protocol changes.  My plan is to do this a bit at a time,
>since I don't want to get far out of sync with CVS.  This means that the
>actual protocol supported by CVS tip is going to change little by
>little.  Yesterday's libpq may or may not talk to today's server.
>
>To try to keep people from wasting time chasing version-skew problems
>while this goes on, I have devised the following plan.  The server and
>libpq will claim to speak protocol numbers 3.100, 3.101, 3.102, etc,
>changing each time a visible change is committed.  There is also a
>temporary hack in postmaster.c that will reject connections from clients
>claiming to speak 3.anything-other-than-postmaster's-version.  If you
>have an out-of-sync libpq, you will get something like
>FATAL: unsupported frontend protocol 3.110: server supports 1.0 to 3.109
>or
>FATAL: Your development libpq is out of sync with the server
>
>After the dust settles, I'll reset the protocol version number to 3.0
>for release.
>
>Note that this should only affect libpq.  Other clients may continue to
>speak protocol 2.0 while this is going on, and that should not change.
>In emergency you should be able to use a 7.3 copy of libpq.so to talk to
>the CVS-tip server.
>
>			regards, tom lane
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
>
>  
>


Sat, 19 Apr 2003 09:32:19 -0400
mlw <pgsql@mohawksoft.com>
Re: Note about upcoming instability in FE/BE protocol
mlw <pgsql@mohawksoft.com> writes:
> Did you ever get my post about making the BE protocol implemented as a 
> shared library?

Yeah.  I'm not planning to think about it in this development cycle,
though.  There's enough on my plate already, and no compelling reason
why such a change would need to be done now rather than later.

			regards, tom lane


Sat, 19 Apr 2003 12:01:30 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Note about upcoming instability in FE/BE protocol 