Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> While this isn't exactly a stop-ship class of problem, it still seems like
>> it'd be good to fix before 9.5.0.
> I wonder if a note to packagers to inform them of the new file added
> after the RC would be a good idea.
On closer look, the busted ALTER OPERATOR functionality is only in HEAD
anyway.
But having said that, I wonder whether we ought not backpatch the header
file splitup anyhow. I observe that pg_operator.h's inclusion of
objectaddress.h is new in 9.5, and it sure looks to me like
objectaddress.h would be problematic for clients to include. So if
we don't do this, we might well get reports of client build failures.
(pg_operator.h is not the only catalog header that includes
objectaddress.h now, but it's the only one that does that and
seems like a plausible file for clients to include.)
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
