| 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: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing array support |
| Date: | 2003-06-28 03:18:18 |
| Message-ID: | 15234.1056770298@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Joe Conway wrote:
>> Yeah, but isn't feature freeze July 1?
> Yes, but once the "feature" is in, you can adjust it if it isn't
> working.
> I am just pointing out that beating the system is a popular hacker
> passtime during beta. :-)
It's just a matter of staking out what's considered an implemented
feature. The ARRAY[] syntax is definitely in, so if it needs a few
adjustments around the edges to make it more spec-compliant, no one
will blink at doing that during beta.
If I were you I'd file this on the to-fix-later list and concentrate
on polymorphic aggregates during the next couple days. If that's not
done by Tuesday it will be a tough sell to put in during beta.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2003-06-28 03:25:21 | Re: Feature request: set planner flags on views |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-28 00:21:12 | Re: Manual fixing of plpgsql_call_handler binary location -- good idea? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2003-06-28 03:32:22 | Re: Missing array support |
| Previous Message | Nabil Sayegh | 2003-06-27 23:40:47 | Re: connectby_reverselookup() |