From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] To Postgres Devs : Wouldn't changing the |
Date: | 2001-10-23 13:52:18 |
Message-ID: | 3BD57612.6E89EC07@fourpalms.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
> I agree completely with these points, which is why I'd rather have seen
> it dealt with (one way or t'other) in 7.2. But we appear to have a lot
> of people who don't think it's been discussed adequately in
> $PREFERRED_FORUM ... and the one thing I *really* don't want is to hold
> up 7.2 beta anymore for this issue. Let's stuff this worm back in the
> can and get on with it.
Frankly, I'd be happy to consider this a bug fix either way. The timing
is compatible with 7.2, and I'm happy that Bruce is bringing this to
resolution. My point was simply that some discussion on -hackers is
appropriate, and that others on -hackers who might have a stake in this
should be in on the discussion.
fwiw, I don't have a strong opinion about *which* path is taken to fix
the problem. But the old implementation is the worst of all worlds, and
the replacement syntax which is already in the code is a better choice.
- Thomas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Denis Gasparin | 2001-10-23 13:52:56 | Re: [ODBC] Writing BLOBS to pgsql via ODBC using VB |
Previous Message | Rich Shepard | 2001-10-23 13:47:30 | Re: Database design? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | mlw | 2001-10-23 14:40:00 | Re: Index of a table is not used (in any case) |
Previous Message | Bill Studenmund | 2001-10-23 13:41:15 | Proposed new create command, CREATE OPERATOR CLASS |