Re: Removal of pg_variable, pg_inheritproc, pg_ipl

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(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 00:16:14
Message-ID: 26647.989885774@sss.pgh.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.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-05-15 00:23:39 Re: Removal of pg_variable, pg_inheritproc, pg_ipl
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-05-15 00:12:56 Re: Removal of pg_variable, pg_inheritproc, pg_ipl