Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 10:00:01AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> (A) This is a new feature. Wait for v16.
>> (B) This is a bug fix. Commit it now and back-patch to v14.
>> (C) This is a cleanup that is OK to put into v15 even after feature
>> freeze but since it is a behavior change we shouldn't back-patch it.
>> I vote for (C). What do other people think?
> I thought the plan was to backpatch to v14.
> v14 psql had an unintentional behavior change, rejecting \d
> datname.nspname.relname.
I agree that the v14 behavior is a bug, so ordinarily I'd vote
for back-patching.
A possible objection to doing that is that the patch changes the
APIs of processSQLNamePattern and patternToSQLRegex. We would avoid
making such a change in core-backend APIs in a minor release, but
I'm not certain whether there are equivalent stability concerns
for src/fe_utils/.
On the whole I'd vote for (B), with (C) as second choice.
regards, tom lane
