Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10DCB4758FE for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:46:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A741475461 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:46:17 -0500 (EST) Received: (from pgman@localhost) by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id gAMFkBi21622; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:46:11 -0500 (EST) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200211221546.gAMFkBi21622@candle.pha.pa.us> Subject: Re: Frontend/Backend protocol changes? In-Reply-To: <3DDDD0F2.5010409@BadgerSE.com> To: Bruce Badger Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:46:11 -0500 (EST) Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200211/102 X-Sequence-Number: 3350 Bruce Badger wrote: > I do watch this list for any discussion of changes to the protocol, but > from Tom's response I guess I should also be looking at protocol.sgml. > Could someone point me to the definitive version of this file so I can > monitor changes to it? Thanks. > > BTW, I think the main reason I got bitten at 7.2 was because the > protocol changed, but the protocol version number did not. > > While I'm on the keyboard, I'd like to say how much I appreciate the > work that Tom, Bruce et al put into making PostgreSQL the system it is. > Thanks for a really great job. What exactly was the change? As I remember, it was something we didn't think would affect anybody, but it did affect you. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073