Re: About the stability of COPY BINARY data
От | Adrian Klaver |
---|---|
Тема | Re: About the stability of COPY BINARY data |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5730b804-3544-4774-92dd-49954b720ac3@aklaver.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: About the stability of COPY BINARY data (Dominique Devienne <ddevienne@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: About the stability of COPY BINARY data
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On 11/7/24 09:55, Dominique Devienne wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 6:39 PM Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org> wrote: >> Dominique Devienne wrote: >>> Also, does the code for per-type _send() and _recv() functions >>> really change across versions of PostgreSQL? How common are >>> instances of such changes across versions? Any examples of such >>> backward-incompatible changes, in the past? >> >> For the timestamp types, I think these functions were >> sending/expecting float8 (before version 7.3), and then float8 or >> int64 depending on the server configuration up until 9.6, and since >> then int64 only. >> The same for the "time" field of the interval type. >> There is still an "integer_datetimes" GUC reflecting this. > > Thanks. So it did happen in a distant past. > Anything below 14 is of no concern to me though. > So again, it does sound like changes are unlikely. Yeah that is implied by: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgupgrade.html "Major PostgreSQL releases regularly add new features that often change the layout of the system tables, but the internal data storage format rarely changes. " The COPY warning is there as heads up that it is a possibility. > > And I haven't seen anything not network-byte-order, > as far architecture is concerned. > > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: