Tom Lane wrote: > "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes: > >> 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. > > Well, how many people want to vote for Andreas' suggestion of having > both > > int pg_cancel_backend(int) > bool pg_backend_cancel(int) > > with the former deprecated but still there for backward compatibility?
-1, too confusing. We have always been willing to modify API's, especially for admin stuff, as we add features. If we keep everything around, we end up like Oracle. That has VARCHAR2 written all over it. :-) -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
