Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> It'd be more future-proof than this patch, but I'm still unconvinced >> about the use-case.
> Do we want to intentionally make binary format a second-class citizen? Well, it's not exactly a first-class citizen; compare for instance the amount of verbiage in the docs about text I/O formats versus the amount about binary formats. But my question isn't about that; it's about why aclitem should be considered a first-class citizen. It makes me uncomfortable that client apps are looking at it at all, because any that do are bound to get broken in the future, even assuming that they get the right answers today. I wonder how many such clients are up to speed for per-column privileges and non-constant default privileges for instance. And sepgsql is going to cut them off at the knees. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers