Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Byron Nikolaidis
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch
Дата
Msg-id 3814E994.24E8AC14@home.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] COMMENT ON patch  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Mike Mascari <mascarim@yahoo.com> writes:
> >> Does this field exist for all previous postgres releases (specifically,
> >> 6.2,6.3, and 6.4) ??
> 
> > And of course, it appears also in 6.4.x, so I assume that it was added
> > between the 6.2 and 6.3 releases. Is that going to be a problem?
> 
> For Peter's purposes, it's unnecessary to worry about anything older
> than 6.4, since he's depending on an up-to-date libpq and current libpq
> won't talk to anything older than 6.4.
> 
> Byron might still care about 6.2 ... I dunno whether ODBC currently
> really works with 6.2 or not, or whether it needs to keep doing so.
> 
>                         regards, tom lane


It still really works with 6.2!   But whether it needs to, is another
question!

I'm not sure if anyone cares if it works with 6.2 (even 6.3 for that
matter) or not.

Byron


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Aaron J. Seigo"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] RFC: Industrial-strength logging
Следующее
От: Tim Holloway
Дата:
Сообщение: Logging - pg_options format change?