Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)
Date: 2013-03-26 00:55:20
Message-ID: 5150F1F8.7030503@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 03/25/2013 10:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, they are, because things break when they're set wrong.
They also make debugging and support harder; you need to get an
ever-growing list of GUC values from the user to figure out what their
query does. bytea_output, standard_conforming_strings, etc. Yick.

That said, I don't have a better answer for introducing non-BC changes.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Darren Duncan 2013-03-26 01:03:56 Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-03-26 00:06:31 Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay