public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <[email protected]>
Cc: Jacob Champion <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Cramer <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Proposal to allow setting cursor options on Portals
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2026 14:22:50 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZyh3gGazhu3kvz4LNSyh6ifUx-sSCyiAoJ+3EnyBSVZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADK3HHKe1PA1U6aB5-7tWBQ0yZGgNvY7H=ECDD9955Pas_zx_Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGECzQRQ5optaG4DPbshKS+zpUtn_oceh8-qdshFbS+-FSb8Dg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOYmi+nVQRpSs3vd_v9L8ytO9wnL2ndnzGwU31aDGorVFxrAYA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGECzQSZ43JMjA8QEJoF9DCdTO0GQeR2qyhouQciSG2ik40Yhg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOYmi+m20jS8zZ2qFpSnvhaqGDX+vtgCsqcu9VhokyLqF8kFag@mail.gmail.com>
<CADK3HH+DPY_x_H=e0c_AVWoUP9E+YXdyJDVvmzYEYxZXT87Agw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGECzQRZwbuSNp-mgPWmC97q63ODAun=pQtXa1Ru19ksz986Hg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADK3HHKDrnRAoAcUv1ucLB0o_ZUcJRwm+jonNPNUHoDtcA9Crw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGECzQQriv-h_h8Ygxh_RfnLt2G4P9nWrpgMi9YL2bmcOLbUEA@mail.gmail.com>
<CADK3HHL_cUzm-R+0nHcLvxdOZQeR0YKQMDjwLTEiGX-F9=tbeA@mail.gmail.com>
<CADK3HH+o9dTYsXpCk7-Z0JW-QB2TV7=e97O8B-XDOGQb14AfSQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOYmi+kkTbuwGa9X=XomNivAw9P4hN3M1U7QXiP7Jw+nrQXtNQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGECzQSfCPXdOpUKfdkPA9iZhGyRjZAad-CXbhApZ2CnjgG2kw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOYmi+=qE1khrtTD7oQVPJQTHoXffQQ0DPHOx870r7801zhw9g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGECzQTKQ! [email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZyh3gGazhu3kvz4LNSyh6ifUx-sSCyiAoJ+3EnyBSVZg@mail.gmail.com>
Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes:
> That sounds like the right approach to me. Note that I have also
> previously expressed my disagreement with the idea of bumping the
> protocol version regularly. I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea
> of using protocol extensions for everything, because I really imagined
> that they would be used for larger features that made a cluster of
> related changes rather than solitary changes, and that there wouldn't
> be many of them.
I kind of doubt that there will ever be many of them, but if we start
to feel like there's a lot, we could invent abbreviations: single
feature names that clients can ask for that are defined to represent
a particular set of older features. But I'd argue that those sets
should be groups of related functions, not "whatever random stuff
exists as of Postgres 27". I think it'll be highly useful for clients
to declare which features they want, rather than leave people
wondering exactly which features this client intends to support.
regards, tom lane
view thread (24+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Proposal to allow setting cursor options on Portals
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox