| From: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators? |
| Date: | 2020-08-27 11:11:51 |
| Message-ID: | CACPNZCsZYmSOV66HQuyF=vGAgi5zONz1H4jhsxEcve2hTbgNqw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 8:55 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:57 AM Mark Dilger
> <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > I wonder if we can get more comments for or against this patch, at least in principle, in the very near future, to help determine whether the deprecation notices should go into v13?
>
> Speaking of that, has somebody written a specific patch for that?
> Like, exactly what are we proposing that this deprecation warning is
> going to say?
Well, for starters it'll say the obvious, but since we have a concrete
timeframe, maybe a <note> tag to make it more visible, like in the
attached, compressed to avoid confusing the cfbot.
--
John Naylor https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| postfix-depr.patch.gz | application/x-gzip | 411 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2020-08-27 11:24:12 | Re: Strange behavior with polygon and NaN |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2020-08-27 11:10:57 | Re: Handing off SLRU fsyncs to the checkpointer |