On 7/29/16 1:33 PM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
On 27.07.2016 05:00, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On 07/26/2016 06:25 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 7/5/16 4:24 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
But notwithstanding your feeling that you would like your application
to break if it makes use of this behaviour, it is a change that might
make some people pretty unhappy - nobody can tell how many.
What is the use of the existing behavior? You get back an arbitrary
implementation dependent value. We don't even guarantee what the value
will be. If we changed it to return a different implementation
dependent value, would users get upset?
No they would not get upset because they wouldn't know.
Can we just do the right thing?
I'm in favour of fixing this, and update the documentation.
+1. I'd say that if users complain we can always create an extension (on
PGXN) that offers the old behavior. Users could even put that function
before pg_catalog in search_path and get the old behavior back.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
