| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_user_functions' notion of user |
| Date: | 2010-08-09 00:40:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4C5F4E93.2000601@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/8/10 8:40 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> Would anyone object to changing it to make it more consistent with
>> other others? And since we're jollily making catalog changes in 9.0
>> still, could this also be backpatched?
I'd object. It's not a bug (arguable spec, maybe, but working as
spec'd), and it's not trivial, and it's functionality we've already
released.
-1 from me for doing anything in 9.0
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-09 02:29:17 | Re: Patch review: make RAISE without arguments work like Oracle |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-09 00:33:23 | Re: pg_stat_user_functions' notion of user |