Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I am not sure whether we should consider back-patching this into 9.1, >> although that would be necessary if we wanted to fix Robert's original >> complaint against 9.1. Thoughts?
> I guess my feeling would be "no", because it seems like a clear > behavior change, even though I agree the new behavior's better. Since > my original investigation was prompted by a customer complaint, it's > tempting to say we should, but there's not much good making customer A > happy if we make customer B unhappy with the same change. Well, although it's a behavior change, it consists entirely of removing an error check. To suppose that this would break somebody's app, you'd have to suppose that they were relying on "SET search_path = no_such_schema" to throw an error. That's possible I guess, but it seems significantly less likely than that somebody would be expecting the ALTER ... SET case to not result in warnings. There are considerably cheaper and easier-to-use methods for checking whether a schema exists than catching an error. Anyway, if you're happy with 9.1 being an outlier on this behavior, I won't press the point. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers