| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Tab complete EXECUTE FUNCTION for CREATE (EVENT) TRIGGER |
| Date: | 2018-10-26 12:08:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20181026120813.GA23571@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 11:15:19AM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> The committed patches look sane to me, but should we back-patch into 11?
>> This isn't quite a bug fix maybe, but it's inconsistent if v11 server &
>> docs recommend this syntax while v11 psql doesn't produce it.
>
> I was going to suggest backpatching it, as I consider it a bug in the
> original implementation, if not critical. Making it harder for people
> to use the recommended syntax than the deprecated one is not nice.
I didn't think that this was much of a big deal as the deprecated
grammar is still supported on v11, but as both of you think in this
sense I am fine to patch REL_11_STABLE as well. Please just wait a
bit...
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-10-26 12:44:07 | Re: Should pg 11 use a lot more memory building an spgist index? |
| Previous Message | Antonin Houska | 2018-10-26 11:32:01 | Comment fix and question about dshash.c |