On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziome...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> >> =?UTF-8?Q?Fabr=C3=ADzio_de_Royes_Mello?= <fabriziome...@gmail.com> writes: >> > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> >> I think it's really too late for this for 9.4. At this point it's >> >> less than 48 hours until beta1 wraps, and we do not have the bandwidth >> >> to do anything but worry about stabilizing the features we've already >> >> got. >> >> > But it's a very small change with many benefits, and Michael acted very >> > proactive to make this happens. >> >> [ shrug... ] "proactive" would have been doing this a month ago. >> If we're going to ship a release, we have to stop taking new features >> at some point, and we are really past that point for 9.4. >> >> And, to be blunt, this is not important enough to hold up the release >> for, nor to take any stability risks for. It should go into the next >> commitfest cycle where it can get a non-rushed review. >> > > I agree with you that is too late to add *new features*. > > But I agree with Andres when he said this is a regression introcuced in the > pg_lsn patch. > > So we'll release a version that break a simple query like that: > > fabrizio=# SELECT DISTINCT (g.i||'/0')::pg_lsn f FROM generate_series(1, > 100) g(i), generate_series(1, 5); > ERROR: could not identify an equality operator for type pg_lsn > LINE 1: SELECT DISTINCT (g.i||'/0')::pg_lsn f FROM generate_series(1... > ^
I agree that this is not new feature but just the fix of oversight of the pg_lsn patch. Without such opclass, we cannot execute even such simple query. Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
