Jim, * Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote: > On 2/9/17 6:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >>I'd love to nuke pg_shadow and all the other > >>not-really-maintained backwards-compat things from when roles were > >>added too. > >Not sure if it's worth the work to rip out and such, but I'm mildly > >supportive of this one too. Depends a bit on what all the other things > >are ;) > > The problem with pg_shadow is unless you specifically looked at it > in the docs after 8.1, you had no idea it was deprecated. I don't > really think of it as deprecated.
It's not even maintained properly, I hardly see how it couldn't be anything but deprecated, and the docs certainly are the right place, if anywhere, to say that something is deprecated. > As someone mentioned, forcing a user to install an extension makes > the deprecation visible. Another option would be to have the backend > spit out a WARNING the first time you access anything that's > deprecated. Both of those are pertinent reminders to people that > they need to change their tools. Ugh. Please, no. Hacking up the backend to recognize that a given query is referring to a deprecated view and then throwing a warning on it is just plain ugly. Let's go one step further, and throw an ERROR if someone tries to query these views instead. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature