Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs

Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>

From: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Jacob Burroughs <jburroughs@instructure.com>, Dave Cramer <davecramer@gmail.com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, "Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Daniele Varrazzo <daniele.varrazzo@gmail.com>
Date: 2024-08-20T15:53:33Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. libpq: Add min/max_protocol_version connection options

  2. libpq: Handle NegotiateProtocolVersion message differently

  3. Add PQfullProtocolVersion() to surface the precise protocol version.

  4. Do not hardcode PG_PROTOCOL_LATEST in NegotiateProtocolVersion

  5. libpq: Handle NegotiateProtocolVersion message

  6. Provide for forward compatibility with future minor protocol versions.

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 17:46, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I personally like this less than both (a) adding a new function and
> (b) redefining the existing function as Jelte proposes. It just seems
> too clever to me.

Agreed, I'm not really seeing a benefit of returning 4 instead of
30004. Both are new numbers that are higher than 3, so on existing
code they would have the same impact. But any new code would be more
readable when using version >= 30004 imho.