Re: [HACKERS] ODBC backward versions

2001-02-11 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Tom Lane wrote: > > "Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Does removing pre-6.4 code improve the status ? > > Yes, it does (IMHO anyway) because it removes a configuration option > that is confusing new users. Right. There's even an idea(not mine) to remove the option by automatically

Re: [HACKERS] ODBC backward versions

2001-02-11 Thread Tom Lane
"Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Does removing pre-6.4 code improve the status ? Yes, it does (IMHO anyway) because it removes a configuration option that is confusing new users. The odds that someone will want to use 7.1 ODBC with a pre-6.4 server seem very small to me, while we do

Re: [HACKERS] ODBC backward versions

2001-02-11 Thread Bruce Momjian
> > -Original Message- > > From: Bruce Momjian > > Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2001 11:01 AM > > To: PostgreSQL-development > > Subject: [HACKERS] ODBC backward versions > > > > > > I checked the logs, and we released the new 6.4 backend

RE: [HACKERS] ODBC backward versions

2001-02-11 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
> -Original Message- > From: Bruce Momjian > Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2001 11:01 AM > To: PostgreSQL-development > Subject: [HACKERS] ODBC backward versions > > > I checked the logs, and we released the new 6.4 backend protocol on > 1998-10-30. That

[HACKERS] ODBC backward versions

2001-02-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
I checked the logs, and we released the new 6.4 backend protocol on 1998-10-30. That was 2.5 years ago. We normally allow older clients to communicate with newer servers, but often we don't support newer clients talking to older servers, sometimes even servers one release in the past. The reaso