From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: proposal: ANSI SQL 2011 syntax for named parameters |
Date: | 2013-02-07 17:06:30 |
Message-ID: | 14654.1360256790@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I don't know what to add to that.
> There's no technical reason that I'm aware of for hstore 1.1 not to
> support all our maintained releases at the same time. That's exactly how
> we do it with non-core extensions, by the way.
If you're suggesting that we should back-patch hstore 1.1 into 9.1,
there might not be a technical reason why we couldn't do it, but there
are certainly project-policy reasons. Removing operators, or indeed
changing any SQL interface at all, is exactly the kind of change we do
not make in back branches.
> To make that easier to maintain, there's a patch in the queue
> implementing default_major_version so that we can ship hstore--1.0.sql
> and hstore--1.0--1.1.sql and still have that command just works:
> CREATE EXTENSION hstore VERSION '1.1';
If the argument for this patch is only to support doing something like
the above, I'd vote for rejecting it entirely.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-02-07 17:13:54 | Re: split rm_name and rm_desc out of rmgr.c |
Previous Message | Kohei KaiGai | 2013-02-07 17:03:56 | Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables |