Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings
Date: 2010-01-29 20:42:20
Message-ID: 10576.1264797740@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
>> default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?

> I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without that.

BTW, core already had that discussion, but maybe I should repeat it
to try to forestall any other "since this is going to be 9.0, let's
break backwards compatibility in a big way!" proposals.  Now is not
the time to be making big changes; we are much too late in the devel
cycle to work through all the possible consequences.  Because we
switched from it's-8.5 to it's-9.0 at such a late stage, we really
need to consider that that's only a marketing version number and
technical compatibility decisions should be made the same way as
for any other major release.

Perhaps at some point we will choose to do a major version bump where
we really do clean up a lot of bad backwards-compatibility things.  That
needs to be done in a deliberate fashion with a lot of advance planning;
and things should get broken near the beginning of the devel cycle, not
the end.

[ still bearing scars from the 8.3 implicit-cast business, which we
didn't think would generate nearly the backlash it did... ]

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-01-29 20:45:54
Subject: Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-29 20:28:35
Subject: Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group