MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <E1vub8B-000rlS-05@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <CAOYmi+=4QhCjssfNEoZVK8LPtWxnfkwT5p-PAeoxtG9gpNjqOQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3626145.1771885089@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <3626145.1771885089@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:51:46 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAOYmi+k8ENYkErqSEYEqW39YWPfe_ii7g5Acm1c9asNuRMriNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: pgsql: libpq: Grease the protocol by default
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
	Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAOYmi%2Bk8ENYkErqSEYEqW39YWPfe_ii7g5Acm1c9asNuRMriNg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 2:18=E2=80=AFPM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Either that or we decide that it's time to throw 9.2 support
> overboard (looks like 9.3 and up are fine).

Well, while I was hacking on a patch I realized that 9.3 (all the way
up to 10) is only okay if you're running a sufficiently patched
version. PG11 is the first to support negotiation for the whole
release line.

> If it's not hard to add the connection option to this test, let's do
> that --- but if it is a problem, I wouldn't shed too many tears over
> moving the oldest-old-version goalpost.  I think we might not be able
> to fix the test without changing buildfarm client script and/or
> configuration.

I think Jelte said it well back on the -committers thread:

> Why only force max_protocol_version=3D3.0 for beta? It sounds like
> this would also be an issue once we eventually bump the default
> version.

So a fix belongs in pg_upgrade, IMO, instead of the test. I have a
draft passing locally that I should be able to share soon.

Thanks,
--Jacob