Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Gregory Stark wrote: >>> "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> We could have the server indicate it's the new protocol by sending the >>> initial >>> cancel key twice. If the client sees more than one cancel key it >>> automatically >>> switches to new-style cancel messages. > >> That will still break things like JDBC I think - they only expect one >> cancel message, and then move on to expect other things. > > Why didn't they follow recommended practice to process any message > anytime? Was/is there a specific reason to avoid that in that driver? > (Just curious).
No idea, but that's how it is IIRC. And there are other drivers to think about as well. >> What would work is using a parameter field, per Stephen's suggestion >> elsewhere in the thread. Older libpq versions should just ignore the >> parameter if they don't know what it is. Question is, is that too ugly a >> workaround, since we'll need to keep it around forever? (We have special >> handling of a few other parameters already, so maybe not?) > > You only need to keep the runtimeparameter for as long as you don't bump > the protocol version. > Then again, runtimeparameters are cheap. Yeah, I guess that's true. Once you break backwards compatibility once, you can break a couple of things at the same time :) //Magnus -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers