On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Merlin Moncure (mmonc...@gmail.com) wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: >> > I don't see why we can't do exactly what you're suggesting in core. >> >> Because you can't (if you're defining core to mean 'not an >> extension'). Functions can't be removed or changed because of legacy >> application support. In an extension world, they can -- albeit not >> 'magically', but at least it can be done. > > That simply isn't accurate on either level- if there is concern about > application support, that can apply equally to core and contrib, and we > certainly *can* remove and/or redefine functions in core with sufficient > cause. It's just not something we do lightly for things living in > either core or contrib. > > For an example, consider the FDW API, particularly what we did between > 9.1 and 9.2.
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree I suppose. Getting back on topic, the question is 'what about jsonb/hstore2'? At this point my interests are practical. I promised (heh) to bone up the docs. I'm on vacation this weekend so it's looking like around sometime late next week for that. In particular, it'd be helpful to get some kind of read on the final disposition of hstore2. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
