Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)

[teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind Glomsrød)]

Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote:
> > > How compatible with 7.0 and 7.1 be from an application standpoint?
> > > Will applications linked with libraries from 7.0 be able to talk to
> > > the 7.1 database?  Any changes in library major versions? The other
> > > way?
>  
> > Historically, all applications have been able to talk to newer servers,
> > so a 6.4 client can talk to a 7.0 postmaster, and I believe 7.0 clients
> > can talk to 7.1 postmasters.
>  
> > We usually do not go the other way, where 6.5 clients can not talk to
> > 6.4 postmasters.  I believe 7.0->7.1 will be able to talk in any
> > 7.0.X/7.1 client and server combination.
> 
> He's meaning the libpq version for dynamic link loading. 

Not only - I'm interested in both issues.

> Is the libpq.so lib changing versions (like the change from 6.5.x to
> 7.0.x changed from libpq.so.2.0 to libpq.so.2.1, which broke binary
> RPM compatibility for other RPM's linked against libpq.so.2.0, which
> failed when libpq.so.2.1 came on the scene

Huh? Shouldn't happen.

> Not just libpq, though -- libpgtcl.so has also been problematic.

I don't think we ship that as a dynamic library.


-- 
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.