Re: @ versus ~, redux

Oleg Bartunov wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>>
>>> I can see various things that we might consider doing:
>>>
>>> 1. Just flip the names of the two operators added by the GIN patch.
>>>
>>> 2. #1 plus flip the names of the various contrib operators that are
>>> out of sync (Michael Fuhr points out that contrib/intarray is out
>>> of step too ... are there others?).
>>>
>>> 3. Leave the existing op names as-is in core and contrib, but consider
>>> them deprecated and add new ops with consistently-chosen names.
>>> (The new ops introduced by GIN should only exist with the new names.)
>
> #3 looks good to me. Too many users. We should give them time for
> upgrading. Probably, we need special chapter "To be obsoleted in the next
> release" in Release notes.

Users will have time to upgrade should they be responsible. Nobody in
their right might is going to upgrade to 8.2 on a production site the
day it is released.

They are going to test it with their code, and their work load. If it
takes them an extra day to implement query changes (or even an extra
month), good. It will serve them better in the long run.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/