From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: New manual chapters |
Date: | 2002-08-06 05:54:17 |
Message-ID: | 6467.1028613257@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Arg. That's something I didn't think of. No, attlognums aren't done. I
> think having drop column is more important than the above concern tho. I'll
> add it to my TODO.
But we *have* drop column.
If we don't do attlognum for 7.3, there's little point in doing it at
all. By the time 7.4 comes out, clients that formerly expected a
consecutive series of attnums will have found some way to cope.
I'm not sure that I feel any strong sense of urgency about this ---
7.3 will break clients that examine the system catalogs in many ways,
and this doesn't seem like the nastiest of 'em.
I just wanted to point out that "we'll do it later" isn't a profitable
attitude towards attlognum. Either it's done by the end of August,
or it never gets done at all.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2002-08-06 05:55:04 | SQL99 CONVERT() function |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-08-06 05:46:23 | Re: New manual chapters |