Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Well, you can rename an item today if you don't mind doing a direct
>> UPDATE on pg_enum. I think that's probably sufficient if the demand
>> only amounts to one or two requests a year. I'd say leave it off the
>> TODO list till we see if there's more demand than that.
> I'd say put it on and mark it with an [E]. We could use some more
> [E]asy items for that list.
We don't need to add marginally-useful features just because they're
easy. If it doesn't have a real use-case, the incremental maintenance
cost of more code is a good reason to reject it.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
