Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > So I guess the question is: Is it worth all that hassle to remove a > misfeature you have to go out of your way to use? Is support for non-1 > lower bounds stopping us from doing something useful and important? Or > is it just an irritation that it exists?
I think the argument really is that some people don't want to make their application code work with such cases (which is fine) so they'd like an inside-the-database guarantee that the app code won't ever see such cases. Which is less fine, ISTM: if you fear some part of your app might be generating such arrays, then you don't have such little use for the feature after all, eh? This is being camouflaged in a whole lot of utter BS about how nobody could possibly be using the feature, nobody *should* want it, it's outside the standard, etc etc. If we ripped out every feature being used by less than 10% of the user base, we'd have a much smaller and more maintainable system, for sure ... but we'd probably piss off upwards of 90% of the user base by doing that. Your useless frammish is the next man's killer feature. 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