| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Subject: | Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname |
| Date: | 2022-04-19 15:26:45 |
| Message-ID: | 2554506.1650382005@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 10:00:01AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> (A) This is a new feature. Wait for v16.
>> (B) This is a bug fix. Commit it now and back-patch to v14.
>> (C) This is a cleanup that is OK to put into v15 even after feature
>> freeze but since it is a behavior change we shouldn't back-patch it.
>> I vote for (C). What do other people think?
> I thought the plan was to backpatch to v14.
> v14 psql had an unintentional behavior change, rejecting \d
> datname.nspname.relname.
I agree that the v14 behavior is a bug, so ordinarily I'd vote
for back-patching.
A possible objection to doing that is that the patch changes the
APIs of processSQLNamePattern and patternToSQLRegex. We would avoid
making such a change in core-backend APIs in a minor release, but
I'm not certain whether there are equivalent stability concerns
for src/fe_utils/.
On the whole I'd vote for (B), with (C) as second choice.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-04-19 15:36:44 | Re: Postgres perl module namespace |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-04-19 14:54:30 | Re: error handling in pqRowProcessor broken |