IMHO, it leads to more maintenance work to support backward
compatibility. Can we give it a desupport version such as saying,
"it's currently deprecated and will be completely removed in 8.2, 8.3,
...?" That way, supporting the both for the short-term wouldn't be
too wasteful.
( sorry Tom, GMAIL defaults to REPLY not REPLY ALL :( )
2005/10/7, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> "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?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>
--
Respectfully,
Jonah H. Harris, Database Internals Architect
EnterpriseDB Corporation
http://www.enterprisedb.com/