On 2017-01-12 13:40:50 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > Jim, > > * Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote: > > The way I see it, either one person can spend an hour or whatever > > creating an extension once, or every postgres install that's using > > any of these functions now has yet another hurdle to upgrading. > > I just don't buy this argument, at all. These functions names are > certainly not the only things we're changing with PG10 and serious > monitoring/backup/administration tools are almost certainly going to > have quite a bit to adjust to with the new release, and that isn't news > to anyone who works with PG.
By that argument we can just do arbitrary backward incompat changes. We should aspire to be better than we've been in the past, not use that past as an excuse for not even trying. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
