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: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings
Date: 2010-02-03 18:48:36
Message-ID: 1071.1265222916@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The argument for doing this now hinges solely on a marketing-driven
>> choice of version name, and not on any actual evidence that applications
>> are ready for it.  We really need to do this at the start of a devel
>> and alpha test cycle, not at the end.

> Application writers probably didn't bother all that much with alphas
> though.  The bulk of them is going to start with the betas, which have
> not been delivered yet, so it seems a good time to try.

I still think that changing it now is going to open a can of worms that
we shouldn't be opening at this stage.  We have got more than enough to
worry about for 9.0 already.  I think it is absolute folly to believe
that this is only going to be a matter of "flip the default and nothing
else is going to pop up".

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alex HunsakerDate: 2010-02-03 18:49:01
Subject: Re: Add on_trusted_init and on_untrusted_init to plperl UPDATED [PATCH]
Previous:From: Greg Sabino MullaneDate: 2010-02-03 18:46:33
Subject: Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings

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