On Thursday, September 12, 2024, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > A possible objection is that if anybody has such a setup and > hasn't noticed a problem because they never change their > timezone setting, they might not appreciate us breaking it. > So I certainly wouldn't propose back-patching this. But > maybe we should add it as a foot-gun defense going forward. > I’m disinclined to begin enforcing this. If they got a volatile data type in a key column and don’t attempt to index the key, which would fail on the volatile side, I’d be mighty surprised. I don’t really have much sympathy for anyone who got themselves into the described position but I don’t see this unsafe enough to force a potentially large table rewrite on those that managed to build a fragile but functioning model. I suggest adding the commentary and queries used to check for just such a situation to the “don’t do this page” of the wiki and there just explain while allowed for backward compatibility it is definitely not a recommended setup. David J.
