On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 at 12:43, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I wrote: > > Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> writes: > >> Would an equivalent "PGWARNING" be something we are open to adding and > >> back-patching? > > > It's not real obvious how pl/r could solve this in a reliable way > > otherwise, so adding that would be OK with me, but I wonder whether > > back-patching is going to help you any. You'd still need to compile > > against older headers I should think. So I'd suggest > > (1) add PGWARNING in HEAD only > > Concretely, maybe like the attached? >
+1 from me. I especially like the changes to the comments as it's more apparent what they should be used for. Dave Cramer > > regards, tom lane > >
