On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alex Hunsaker <bada...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 11:04, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> If we were a bit earlier in the 9.0 cycle I would suggest that this >>> confusion is a sufficient reason to drop the one-argument form of >>> string_agg. It's too late now though. > >> FWIW I think we can still change it. Isn't this type of issue part >> of what beta is for? If we were in RC that would be a different story >> :) > > Well, it'd take an initdb to get rid of it. In the past we've avoided > forcing initdb post-beta1 unless it was Really Necessary. OTOH, we seem > to be in the mode of encouraging beta testers to test pg_upgrade, so > maybe that concern isn't worth much at the moment.
I vote fix it. This is going to be a high travel function, and should be right. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
