On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:22 PM, David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> 
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Peter Eisentraut < 
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com [peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com] > wrote:
On 5/5/17 08:43, David Rowley wrote:
> How about we get the ball rolling on this in v10 and pull that part
> out of the docs. If anything that'll buy us a bit more wiggle room to
> change this in v11.
> I've attached a proposed patch.

If we just tell them that the thing they might have relied on might go
away, without a replacement to suggest, then we're just confusing and
scaring them, no?

We'd end up suggesting our OFFSET 0 hack as true protection. If they know for a 
fact that their use of CTE for its barrier properties is not supported they are 
also more likely to document intentional usage with something like: "-- CHANGE 
THIS ONCE VERSION 11 IS RELEASED!!! --" which would make finding the call sites 
that need to add the new "MATERIALIZED" ​keyword much easier. How about adding 
MATERIALIZED now (in 10) as a noise word. Give people a release to switch over 
before pulling the rug.. Cheers Serge

Reply via email to