Horton

Re: Thoughts on a "global" client configuration?

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Date: 2025-10-13T20:24:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 4:22 PM Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org> wrote:
> Re: Robert Haas
> > My theory is that they'll be even less impressed if they try to use a
> > supposedly-compatible library and it breaks a bunch of stuff, but I
> > wonder what Christoph Berg (cc'd) thinks.
>
> It would also hinder adoption of PG in more places. There are
> currently thousands of software products that link to libpq in some
> form, and it would take several years to have them all fixed if
> ABI/API compatibility were broken. Chasing the long tail there is
> hard; we get to witness that every year with upstreams that aren't
> compatible with PG18 yet. For some extensions, I'm still waiting to
> get my PG17 (or PG16!) patches merged.

So you support calling it libpq.so.5 forever, no matter how much we change?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com