Re: pg_group_name_index corrupt?

The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
>> If we are going to have to force a new initdb here, we probably ought
>> to reconsider a couple of recent past decisions that were put off on
>> grounds of "we don't want another initdb before 7.0". I'm thinking of
>> the remaining ODBC support functions and the new LIKE estimator in
>> particular. Do we want to revisit those decisions, or leave well enough
>> alone?

> Leave well enough alone ... this fixed, IMHO, a *very* important potential
> bug, whereas the other two can be worked around. AT this *really* late
> stage in the cycle, fixing one bug at least only opens us up to the
> possibility of one bug ... doing the ODBC/LIKE stuff aren't mission
> critical, and really only affect a relatively small group of ppl in
> comparison ...

That's a fair objection for the LIKE estimator, which after all hasn't
gotten much testing. I'll leave well enough alone there. But those
missing ODBC functions are just another dozen SQL-function entries for
pg_proc; hard to see how they can break anything else, even if (worst
case) they're wrong themselves ...

regards, tom lane