Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The counterargument has been that a PostgreSQL major version upgrade
> would typically require a version upgrade of all language handlers. In
> my experience of maintaining and observing the maintenance of binary
> packages for PostgreSQL and languages, this is decidedly false, at
> least in the general case.
Really? I'd argue the opposite. See also the recent proposal to
*force* recompilation of all loadable shared libraries for every
major PG version, by means of embedding a version number in them.
If you think that would be a bad idea you'd better weigh in on that
thread pretty soon ...
> The PL/PHP package is a pretty obvious case where things can go wrong,
> especially if you have tight dependencies. You may decide that the
> next version of PL/PHP will require PHP 5.2.0. You put that in the
> pltemplate for PostgreSQL 8.2.
Hm? Where in pltemplate is there any knowledge of PHP versions?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
