Re: Removal of pg_variable, pg_inheritproc, pg_ipl

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removal of pg_variable, pg_inheritproc, pg_ipl
Date: 2001-05-15 00:23:39
Message-ID: 200105150023.f4F0NdB25488@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >> Why did you remove indisclustered?
> >>
> >> Useless it may be, but gratuitously breaking at least two extant clients
> >> doesn't seem like a good idea ...
>
> > I patched the clients also. Is that a problem?
>
> Yes. People frequently try to use clients that aren't the same rev
> as the server. There's no good reason to remove this column at all,
> and creating a version incompatibility for two major clients seems like
> sufficient reason not to.
>
> I recommend reverting that change.

Doing it now, but just to the system catalogs. No reason to keep the
backend code.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-05-15 00:25:07 Re: Removal of pg_variable, pg_inheritproc, pg_ipl
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-05-15 00:16:14 Re: Removal of pg_variable, pg_inheritproc, pg_ipl