Re: function defined (or not), more worries on version 10->14 upgrade

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: function defined (or not), more worries on version 10->14 upgrade
Date: 2022-04-15 21:20:24
Message-ID: 1799103.1650057624@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I'm about to unleash new versions of the above and related functions
> (args will change), so a drops are imminent. Any reason to hold off on that?

While I've not yet looked at the code, I've got no reason to think
this is anything except fragile argument parsing in \df and \sf.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2022-04-15 21:24:07 Re: function defined (or not), more worries on version 10->14 upgrade
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2022-04-15 21:18:34 Re: function defined (or not), more worries on version 10->14 upgrade