On 3/4/15 12:20 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > On 3/4/15 6:19 PM, I wrote: >> On 3/4/15 5:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> It was considered to be a bug fix; more, given the few complaints about >>> the clearly-broken old behavior, we thought it was a fix that would >>> affect >>> few people, and them positively. >> >> Yeah, but these things usually go the other way. "This has been broken >> for 10 years but nobody noticed, so we're not going to fix this" > > Sorry, that should have said "we're not going to fix this *in the back > branches*".
I tend to agree. I was not in favor of backpatching, but other people were in favor of it, and no one spoke up against it. That said, if I understand your test case correctly, this would basically be an argument against any semantic corrections in stable releases, since user code could expect to continue to work with the previous incorrect value. You can always test the server version number, and you'll have to for the next major release anyway. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
