Re: pageinspect's infomask and infomask2 as smallint

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pageinspect's infomask and infomask2 as smallint
Date: 2011-02-15 15:53:32
Message-ID: 9388.1297785212@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I don't see any reason that the old version of the function couldn't be
>> dropped in the upgrade script. It's not likely anything would be
>> depending on it, is it?

> I don't see much point in taking the risk.

What risk? And at least we'd be trying to do it cleanly, in a manner
that should work for at least 99% of users. AFAICT, Heikki's proposal
is "break it for everyone, and damn the torpedoes".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-02-15 15:54:49 Re: sepgsql contrib module
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2011-02-15 15:50:19 Re: sepgsql contrib module