On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On 2014-05-10 19:19:22 -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > > On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > > > > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > > > I don't even understand why it's questionable whether this should be > > > > fixed. > > > > > > Sigh. We have some debate isomorphic to this one every year, it seems > > > like. The argument why it shouldn't be fixed now is: ITS. TOO. LATE. > > > Which part of that isn't clear to you? > > > > > > > Sorry but I don't understand why it's too late. The 9.4 branch not been > > created yet. > > The problem is that once the beta is in progress (starting tomorrow), > the projects tries to avoid changes which require a dump and restore (or > pg_upgrade). Since the patch changes the catalog it'd require that. >
Hmmmm... so the other option maybe is create an extension to add this operators. Thoughts? -- Fabrízio de Royes Mello Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL >> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br >> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com >> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
