Re: Could postgres be much cleaner if a future release skipped backward compatibility?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Could postgres be much cleaner if a future release skipped backward compatibility?
Date: 2009-10-20 15:04:45
Message-ID: 27414.1256051085@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> writes:
> That particular example is a very poor one for illustrating your
> point. You severely underestimate "get away with" for the implicit
> cast changes in 8.3. This was a really big deal for many, many users
> of Postgres, and continues to cause many problems to this day.

Actually, that was *exactly* my point. What's being blithely discussed
here is to make tens of changes that would be equally as painful as that
one, all at once. You really think that would fly?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2009-10-20 15:07:05 Re: Re: BUG #5065: pg_ctl start fails as administrator, with "could not locate matching postgres executable"
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-10-20 14:52:41 Re: Application name patch - v2