On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 08:06:44AM +0800, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> Sorry I didn't mention the reason why I think WITHOUT OIDS should be removed.
>
> WITHOUT OIDS has been a backward-compatible syntax for 6 years, so I
> think maybe not too many users use it nowadays. Besides, there are
> some hints i
On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 12:49 AM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 11:06:11PM +0800, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> > WITH OIDS was removed in v12, I'm wondering if we could remove the
> > WITHOUT OIDS support for v19.
>
> AFAICT this would produce less helpful error messages and might even
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 11:11 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Junwang Zhao writes:
> > WITH OIDS was removed in v12, I'm wondering if we could remove the
> > WITHOUT OIDS support for v19.
>
> Why?
Sorry I didn't mention the reason why I think WITHOUT OIDS should be removed.
WITHOUT OIDS has been a backw
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 11:06:11PM +0800, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> WITH OIDS was removed in v12, I'm wondering if we could remove the
> WITHOUT OIDS support for v19.
AFAICT this would produce less helpful error messages and might even break
applications, which I don't think is worth it to save ~90 li
Junwang Zhao writes:
> WITH OIDS was removed in v12, I'm wondering if we could remove the
> WITHOUT OIDS support for v19.
Why?
regards, tom lane
Hi hackers,
WITH OIDS was removed in v12, I'm wondering if we could remove the
WITHOUT OIDS support for v19.
attach is the trivial patch for $subject.
--
Regards
Junwang Zhao
v1-0001-chore-remove-WITHOUT-OIDS-syntax.patch
Description: Binary data
