On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 8:54 AM Jeremy Schneider <schnj...@amazon.com> wrote:
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CABTbUpiAOKZ405uArt8cJFtC72RhzthmvWETQK_6Qw0Ad-HquQ%40mail.gmail.com > > This thread on hackers actually seemed kindof short to me. Not nearly > enough bike-shedding to call it a closed case. > Seemed about right: "We should do this" Yes No - with a reason No - with a reason No - improve user education No - emphatically Yes - but ends ups deferring to the majority No one else chooses to voice an opinion The status quo prevailed since no-one chose to contribute further arguments for change and the original patch was retracted. What kind of "bike-shedding" (which seems to be used incorrectly here) would you expect? All I can speak for is personal usage but I don't find the current default to be an issue. I'm also generally opposed to changing this kind of default even when I disagree with its current value. If anything psql is a bit too permissive by default IMO. Default should be as safe as possible even at the cost of user inconvenience - so that unknowledgeable people get the most protection. If options exist to trade safety for convenience that is good - each user can make that trade-off for themselves and in the process be aware of what exactly their decision entails. David J.
