Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > That was my thinking. The issue has probably been there since 7.3. I > > don't > > think we need to shove in a solution now, especially when there is so much > > disagreement about the behavior. > > Well, we have a new issue that has made the problem much worse (ie ALTER > SCHEMA RENAME), and these problems are not going to get any easier to > solve later. I think we should agree on something and do it. > > Ripping out ALTER SCHEMA RENAME is not a solution unless you have a path > to a solution later with more work. So far there has been nothing in > the way of "here is a proposal that will work but it'll take too much > time to implement for 8.1". Eventually we are going to have to settle > on one of the lesser evils, so why not now?
Well, we are only giving ourselves a few weeks to solve this, and I think a hack to make it work cleanly for users is better than supporting two function names perpetually. Remember the now, now(), CURRENT_TIMESTAMP issue of early binding. It is still confusing to remember which is which, and doing it for sequences new function names is confusing too. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
