On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > In any case, the whole exercise is pointless if we don't change the > visible behavior of array_dims et al. So I think the idea that this > would be without visible consequence is silly. What's up for argument > is just how much incompatibility is acceptable.
The only reasonable answer for this (a provably used, non-security, non-standards violating, non-gross functionality breakage case) is *zero*. Our historically cavalier attitude towards compatibility breakage has been an immense disservice to our users and encourages very bad upgrade habits and is, IMNSHO, embarrassing. Changing the way array_dims works for a minor functionality enhancement is gratuitous and should be done, if at all, via a loudly advertised deprecation/replacement cycle with a guarding GUC (yes, I hate them too, but not nearly as much as the expense of qualifying vast code bases against random compatibility breakages every release). merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
