On 05/19/2010 11:19 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> >> wrote: >>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Greg Sabino Mullane <g...@turnstep.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> given how much faster the new format is (or rather how slow the old one >>>>>> was) and the number of people I have seen complaining "why is bytea so >>>>>> slow) I would like to see it staying turned on by default. However this >>>>>> also depends on how quickly database driver developers can adapt. >>>> >>>> DBD::Pg is already patched, and will very likely be released before 9.0 >>> >>> How do the distros generaly deal with that? E.g. do we have to wait >>> for RHEL7 for it to actually show up in redhat? >> >> Yeah, that's what I'm worried about. I remember going through this >> with E'' quoting. It wasn't fun. > > Right. So do we know what the policy is? As long as DBD::Pg is > released before pg 9.0 we'd be fine, *provided* that they > (redhat/novell/debian/whatever) actually pull in the latest version at > that point...
well the next debian release (squeeze) is likely to end up with 8.4 anyway, same for RHEL6 I believe. so I don't think we really have a "problem" there. It might actually be not to bad a time to break compatibility because there is a long time for distros to catch up after their next releases. For debian 9.0 will likely show up in backports but i would expect them to provide a backport of the relevant drivers as well (or change the default for the backport). Stefan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
