Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start >> printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"? Or do we think that needs to wait?
> I have to admit that I didn't consider that. What do you think? I > guess I'd be tentatively in favor of changing that to match, but I > could be convinced otherwise. Well, as said upthread, the argument for not changing would be that it would make it easier to dump views and reload them into older PG versions. I'm not sure how big a consideration that is, or whether it outweighs possible cross-DBMS compatibility benefits of dumping the more standard syntax. Presumably we are going to change it at some point; maybe we should just do it rather than waiting another 5 years. IOW, I guess I lean mildly towards changing, but I've been beaten up enough lately about backwards-compatibility worries that I'm not going to fight for changing this. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers