X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [203.217.65.65])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D576647592C; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:42:56 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.localdomain (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2AMgui2011607;
	Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:42:57 +1100
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
From: Bruce Badger <bruce_badger@badgerse.com>
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <303E00EBDD07B943924382E153890E5433F7F4@cuthbert.rcsinc.local>
References: <303E00EBDD07B943924382E153890E5433F7F4@cuthbert.rcsinc.local>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) 
Date: 11 Mar 2003 09:42:56 +1100
Message-Id: <1047336177.10725.15.camel@alice>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Archive-Number: 200303/396
X-Sequence-Number: 36642

On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 09:18, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > If the backend can not handle the version I request, but can handle a
> > prior version, I'd like to know.  I am planning on having handlers for
> > multiple protocol versions in the same memory space (I'm using
> > Smalltalk, BTW) so that one application can talk to various databases
> of
> > various vintages.
> > 
> how about a system table, say pg_features which can be queried by the fe
> interface?  This could be a table of bools with named features and/or
> other little widgets for compatibility.  No protocol modification
> required, unless the scope of the protocol change is such that you can't
> execute a connection and a query.

But wouldn't you have to connect to get this information?  Surely this
is a catch 22.