Re: Is a UDF binary portable across different minor releases and PostgreSQL distributions?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: Is a UDF binary portable across different minor releases and PostgreSQL distributions?
Дата
Msg-id CAB7nPqSnkbCjRX=sq7+WO-hm5AKt44Zik+x6q6aPmqpcARrEdw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Is a UDF binary portable across different minor releases and PostgreSQL distributions?  ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Ответы Re: Is a UDF binary portable across different minor releases and PostgreSQL distributions?  ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
<tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> I'd like to document the policy clearly in the upgrade section of PostgreSQL manual, eliminating any ambiguity, so
thatusers can determine what they should do without fear like "may or may not work".  Which of the following policies
shouldI base on?
 
>
> Option 1:
> Rebuild UDFs with the target PostgreSQL distribution and minor release.
>
> Option 2:
> Rebuild UDFs with the target PostgreSQL distribution.
> You do not have to rebuild UDFs when you upgrade or downgrade the minor release.  (If your UDF doesn't work after
changingthe minor release, it's the bug of PostgreSQL.  You can report it to pgsql-bugs.)
 

That would not be a bug of PostgreSQL, the terms are incorrect. If
there is an API breakage, the extension needs to keep up in this case,
so it would be better to mention asking on the lists what may have
gone wrong.
-- 
Michael



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Is a UDF binary portable across different minor releases and PostgreSQL distributions?
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: _mdfd_getseg can be expensive