* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:54 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > > Note that these views have not been consistently maintained and have > > ended up including some role attributes from recent versions > > That's not a bug. According to the documentation, these views exist > for compatibility with PostgreSQL versions before 8.1, so there's no > need to update them with newer fields. Clients who are expecting to > talk with a pre-8.1 PostgreSQL won't expect those fields to be present > anyway.
Yet we added bypassrls to them, after a similar discussion of how they're for backwards compat and we can't get rid of them, but we should update them with new things, blah, blah. > My big objection to removing these views is that it will break pgAdmin > 3, which uses all three of these views. I understand that the pgAdmin > community is now moving away from pgAdmin 3 and toward pgAdmin 4, but > I bet that pgAdmin 3 still has significant usage and will continue to > have significant usage for at least a year or three. When it's > thoroughly dead, then I think we can go ahead and do this, unless > there are other really important tools still depending on those views, > but it's only been 3 months since the final pgAdmin 3 release. IMHO, if it's dead enough to not get updated for such changes then we shouldn't care enough about it to maintain backwards compat views in our code-base for it. > IMHO, these views aren't costing us much. It'd be nice to get rid of > them eventually but a view definition doesn't really need much > maintenance. (A contrib module doesn't either, but more than a view > definition.) Clearly, it does need some form of maintenance and consideration or it ends up in a confusing and inconsistent state, as evidenced by the fact that that's exactly where we are. I don't really expect to actually win this argument, as I've had the experience of trying to fight this fight before, but I certainly don't agree that we should try to continue to maintain them for pgAdmin3's sake. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature