On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 at 15:26, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote:
> On 16/08/2024 21:01, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 1:44 PM Jacob Champion > > <jacob.champ...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> > https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/blob/658afe4cd90d3e167d7c98d22824a8d6ec895b1c/tests/test_async.py#L89 > >> > https://github.com/infusion/PHP/blob/7ebefb6426bb4b4820a30cca5c3a10bfd757b6ea/ext/pgsql/pgsql.c#L864 > > > > IMHO these examples establish beyond doubt that the existing function > > really is being used in ways that would break if we committed the > > proposed patch. To be honest, I'm slightly surprised, because protocol > > version 2 has been so dead for so long that I would not have > > anticipated people would even bother checking for it. But these > > examples show that some people do. If Jacob found these examples this > > easily, there are probably a bunch of others. > > > > It's not worth breaking existing code to avoid adding one new libpq > > entrypoint. Let's just add the new function and move on. > > +1. Jacob is right. > For those of us who don't use a function. How will this work ? Dave
