On Oct 29, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Yeah, I think we're going to have to live with it, at least for 8.4. One >> could make an argument that 9.0 is new enough we could get away with a small >> behavior change to avoid a large amount of user confusion. But that may be >> a self-serving argument based on wanting to tamp down the bug reports rather >> than a wisely considered policy decision... so I'm not sure I quite buy it. > > Well, tamping down the bug reports is good from the users' point of view > too. > > The argument for not changing it in the back branches is that there > might be someone depending on the 8.4/9.0 behavior. However, that seems > moderately unlikely. Also, if we wait, that just increases the chances > that someone will come to depend on it, and then have a problem when > they migrate to 9.1. I think the "risk of breakage" argument has a lot > more force when considering long-standing behaviors than things we just > recently introduced.
I'm not entirely sure that a behavior we released well over a year ago can be considered "just recently introduced"... ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
