Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)
Date: 2009-12-03 20:46:44
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I agree that search and replace isn't that hard, but I don't find the
>> proposed construction awkward, and we have various uses of it in the
>> docs already.  Actually the COPY one is not quite clear whether it
>> means <= 7.3 or < 7.3.  I think we're just aiming for consistency here
>> as much as anything.
> Well, the problem is that "<= 8.4" is confusing as to whether it
> includes 8.4.n.  You and I know that it does because we know we
> don't make feature changes in minor releases, but this is not
> necessarily obvious to everyone.  "< 8.5" is much less ambiguous.

Ah.  I would not have considered that, but it does make sense.


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg SmithDate: 2009-12-03 20:50:37
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-12-03 20:33:51
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group