Argh. This thread appears to have been forgotten - sorry about that. Given that we're taling about a potential protocol change, we really should resolve this before we wrap beta, no?
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >>> Will it break using pg_basebackup 9.2 on a 9.1 server, though? that >>> would also be very useful in the scenario of the central server... >> >> No unless I'm missing something. Because pg_basebackup doesn't use >> any message which is defined in walprotocol.h if "-x stream" option is >> not specified. > > No, this is not right at all :( Changing TimestampTz fields in 9.2 would break > that use case. > > If we support that use case, pg_basebackup 9.2 must know which an integer > or a double is used for TimestampTz in 9.1 server. Otherwise pg_basebackup > cannot process a WAL data message proporly. But unfortunately there is no > way for pg_basebackup 9.2 to know that... 9.1 has no API to report the actual > datatype of its TimestampTz field. > > One idea to support that use case is to add new command-line option into > pg_basebackup, which specifies the datatype of TimestampTz field. You can > use one pg_basebackup 9.2 executable on 9.1 server whether > --disable-integer-datetimes is specified or not. But I'm not really sure if > it's > worth doing this, because ISTM that it's rare to build a server and a > client with > the different choice about TimestampTz datatype. I think that's survivable - but what will things look like if they do mismatch? Can we detect "abnormal values" somewhere and at least abort in a controlled fashion saying "sorry, wrong build flags"? -- 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
