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

Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>

From: Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>

To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <me@jeltef.nl>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, 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>

Date: 2024-05-23T18:25:55Z

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 →

libpq: Add min/max_protocol_version connection options
- 285613c60a7a 18.0 landed
libpq: Handle NegotiateProtocolVersion message differently
- 5070349102af 18.0 landed
Add PQfullProtocolVersion() to surface the precise protocol version.
- cdb6b0fdb0b2 18.0 landed
Do not hardcode PG_PROTOCOL_LATEST in NegotiateProtocolVersion
- 516b87502dc1 18.0 landed
libpq: Handle NegotiateProtocolVersion message
- bbf9c282ce92 16.0 cited
Provide for forward compatibility with future minor protocol versions.
- ae65f6066dc3 11.0 cited

On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 11:12 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> If a reader doesn't recognize a particular
> chunk code, it can still tell whether the chunk is "critical" or not,
> and thereby decide if it must give up or can proceed while ignoring
> that chunk.)

Would it be good to expand on that idea of criticality? IIRC one of
Jelte's complaints earlier was that middleware has to know all the
extension types anyway, to be able to figure out whether it has to do
something about them or not. HTTP has the concept of hop-by-hop vs
end-to-end headers for related reasons.

--Jacob