> No, it *isn't* a good idea. GUCs that change application-visible
> semantics are dangerous. We should have learned this lesson by now.
Really? I thought that standard_conforming_strings was a great example
of how to ease our users into a backwards-compatibility break. My
thought was that we change the behavior in 9.4, provide a
backwards-compatible GUC with warnings in the logs for two versions, and
then take the GUC away.
Whether that's worth the effort, though, is a question of how many
people are going to be affected by the compatibility break. Maybe I can
do a survey.
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Fujii Masao||Date: 2013-03-25 17:28:53|
|Subject: Re: odd behavior in materialized view|
|Previous:||From: Atri Sharma||Date: 2013-03-25 17:06:20|
|Subject: Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay|