> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Treat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 07 October 2005 16:36 > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Cc: Dave Page; Tom Lane > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not? > > On Friday 07 October 2005 03:50, Dave Page wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Lane > > > Sent: 07 October 2005 02:28 > > > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > > > Subject: [HACKERS] Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not? > > > > > > 2. Revert the result type of pg_cancel_backend() to int, but > > > leave the > > > rest as-is (minimum change to avoid a compatibility break > > > with 8.0). > > > > +1 (I do know people who will need to modify scripts because of this > > change), though I'm obviously not going to win having > already scanned > > the entire thread :-) > > I'm sympathetic to this, but doesn't it seem worse to have > this one function > return int if all the others return boolean?
It's not pretty, but then how many other names might we change these days because they don't fit in with current thinking? > Also they > don't need to modify > scripts, can't they just write thier own pg_cacnel_backend to > return int > based on the boolean version? No, because you can't overload based purely on return type. I suppose they could write it to take an int8 pid or something, but that's a hack. Regards, Dave. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend