On Fri, 22 Oct 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> backwards incompatibility for. Two major releases ago, we could have
> considered it...
Of course you shouldn't break backward compability over it. I thought it
was new stuff in 8.0 hence my comment.
--
/Dennis Björklund
---(end
Dennis Bjorklund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Couldn't we then have this syntax instead
> SET [ SESSION | LOCAL ] AUTHORIZATION username
> SET [ SESSION | LOCAL ] AUTHORIZATION DEFAULT
I don't think the (alleged) gain in prettiness is worth introducing
backwards incompatibility for. Two maj
