On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> BTW, the bitmask isn't perfect either --- doesn't it just reintroduce >> the problem already complained of with your idea for PQinitSSL? That >> is, how does the client know whether the function recognized all the >> bits it passed? > > Well, if we add the PQgetLibraryVersion() function I suggested > upthread, then it can check that first. I find it difficult to > believe that isn't a good idea independently of how we solve this > particular problem.
I'd prefer PQversion() as a name. Also, it doesn't necessarily handle the issue directly. For example, it doesn't tell you which bits are valid...you have to guess. Also, do we really need a function for this? Is the generic init worth discussion or a non starter? I guess we have a scheduling problem here...I think the ssl problem is serious enough to warrant a fast-track into 8.4, but maybe it's 'too much' to hash out a generic library initialization routine this late in the cycle. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers