Paul Eggert wrote:
> > From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
> > Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 12:05:17 -0500 (EST)
> > This is an interesting patch, but have not heard anyone else have this
> > problem
> That's not surprising, since I am purposely running a bleeding-edge
> system to test PostgreSQL portability. Nobody is shipping POSIX
> 1003.1-2001 systems yet (the standard was only approved in December by
> the IEEE, and it will not be an official ISO standard for a few more
> weeks yet). But when they do, you will run into this problem.
> > and am hesitant to add more cost to fix something that may not be
> > broken. Sorry.
> There is no cost to PostgreSQL in normal operation, since that part of
> the source isn't affected at all. All that is affected is some of the
> test scripts and documentation. I see little risk to incorporating
> the patch, but of course it's your decision.
We are kind of picky about adding complexity when it isn't required.
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
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2002-03-11 23:24:17|
|Subject: Re: psql: backslash fix|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2002-03-11 22:51:22|
|Subject: Re: Domain Patch|