On 2021-Apr-29, Tom Lane wrote:
> (On the other hand, if it were written the other way already, I'd also
> argue to leave it like that. Basically, this sort of change is just not
> worth troubling over. It doesn't improve things meaningfully and it
> creates back-patching hazards.)
This argument applies equally well to the patch at
http://postgr.es/m/CAAJ_b94M_1YoybQpNjmD+ZFZkUT2OpoP5xnFiWM+X=xh-nX23Q@mail.gmail.com
so if we reject this one, we should reject that one too.
CC'ed patch author.
--
Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile