BUG #12746: Backward compatibility is broken 9.2: pg_stat_activity.procpid renamed to pid

Started by Nonameabout 11 years ago4 messagesbugs
Jump to latest
#1Noname
nad2000@gmail.com

The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference: 12746
Logged by: Rad Cirskis
Email address: nad2000@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.2.0
Operating system: Linux
Description:

I run an app that should support both 9.0 and 9.4. I found that at 9.2 the
pg_stat_activity column porcpid was renamed to pid. It broke the app. To
solve it I had to introduce conditional querying for different versions.
I don't think it's right time to do any aesthetically motivated changes at
this stage.

--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs

#2Marko Tiikkaja
marko@joh.to
In reply to: Noname (#1)
Re: BUG #12746: Backward compatibility is broken 9.2: pg_stat_activity.procpid renamed to pid

On 2015-02-08 23:43, nad2000@gmail.com wrote:

I run an app that should support both 9.0 and 9.4. I found that at 9.2 the
pg_stat_activity column porcpid was renamed to pid. It broke the app. To
solve it I had to introduce conditional querying for different versions.
I don't think it's right time to do any aesthetically motivated changes at
this stage.

9.2 was released over two years ago. I think it was a mistake to rename
it, but it's a bit too late object. Renaming it back to "procpid"
wouldn't help anyone.

.m

--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs

#3Andres Freund
andres@anarazel.de
In reply to: Marko Tiikkaja (#2)
Re: BUG #12746: Backward compatibility is broken 9.2: pg_stat_activity.procpid renamed to pid

On 2015-02-08 23:46:43 +0100, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:

On 2015-02-08 23:43, nad2000@gmail.com wrote:

I run an app that should support both 9.0 and 9.4. I found that at 9.2 the
pg_stat_activity column porcpid was renamed to pid. It broke the app. To
solve it I had to introduce conditional querying for different versions.
I don't think it's right time to do any aesthetically motivated changes at
this stage.

What do you mean with "at this stage"? 9.2 was a new major release, and
we don't guarantee compatibilities between major releases.

9.2 was released over two years ago. I think it was a mistake to rename it,
but it's a bit too late object. Renaming it back to "procpid" wouldn't help
anyone.

I agree that it wasn't a good idea and that it's too late to change it
now.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs

#4Tom Lane
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
In reply to: Noname (#1)
Re: BUG #12746: Backward compatibility is broken 9.2: pg_stat_activity.procpid renamed to pid

nad2000@gmail.com writes:

I run an app that should support both 9.0 and 9.4. I found that at 9.2 the
pg_stat_activity column porcpid was renamed to pid. It broke the app. To
solve it I had to introduce conditional querying for different versions.
I don't think it's right time to do any aesthetically motivated changes at
this stage.

The commit log entry about that provides a bit of context:

commit 4f42b546fd87a80be30c53a0f2c897acb826ad52
Author: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Date: Thu Jan 19 14:19:20 2012 +0100

Separate state from query string in pg_stat_activity

This separates the state (running/idle/idleintransaction etc) into
it's own field ("state"), and leaves the query field containing just
query text.

The query text will now mean "current query" when a query is running
and "last query" in other states. Accordingly,the field has been
renamed from current_query to query.

Since backwards compatibility was broken anyway to make that, the procpid
field has also been renamed to pid - along with the same field in
pg_stat_replication for consistency.

Scott Mead and Magnus Hagander, review work from Greg Smith

Basically the point being that you're going to need some version
conditionality *anyway* in pretty much any app using this view.

In any case, as Marko noted, you're about three years too late to complain
about this. We're certainly not changing back now.

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs