On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 13:14 +0000, Greg Stark wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > > In the longer term it will be very useful to have the ability to support > > multiple language variants, including older PostgreSQL syntax to allow > > legacy systems to work with Postgres at the same time as allowing new > > development to continue. > > > So I think having multiple parsers for different versions of Pg > backwards compatibility is an awful idea.
There are a number of people interested in producing open source compatibility layers. I realise you may not be one of them, but that's no reason to stop the idea from taking root. > It would be a huge > maintenance headache since every time we change a structure that the > parser works someone would have to maintain all those compatibility > parsers. If it's a plugin that "someone" isn't any concern of ours. External projects can keep up with releases, or specific customer implementations may simply choose to standardise on one release and go with that. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
