On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Maciek Sakrejda <m.sakre...@gmail.com> writes: >> One of our customers seems to be running into exactly the issue >> hypothesized about by Tom here: >> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/8040.1314403...@sss.pgh.pa.us >> Was the possibility of an inadvertent protocol downgrade addressed as part >> of that patch? I read through the thread, but it wasn't entirely clear. > > No, a quick look at report_fork_failure_to_client shows it still always > sends V2 protocol. We fixed some of the lesser issues discussed in that > thread, but I don't think we ever agreed how to deal with this one. > > I've been thinking of late that it might be time to retire libpq's > support for V2 protocol (other than in the specific context of the first > error message received while trying to make a connection). If we did > that, we'd remove the code path that thinks it should downgrade to V2 > protocol, and thus fix this problem by removing code not adding more. > > However, that doesn't sound like a back-patchable solution, and also > it remains unclear whether non-libpq clients such as JDBC have an issue > with this.
It's probably worth polling for that. I believe the jdbc driver at least has code for it, but I don't know if it's a requirement at this point. If it is, that might be a "10.0 release" feature, in how it would break things :( -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
