| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Skip ALTER x SET SCHEMA if the schema didn't change |
| Date: | 2015-11-05 21:15:44 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYPKu9a+9j4r_pPCVTwFC=hUkdPz8124YS5jfSe1u2wXQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I went through the patch, following are my observations,
>
> Patch applied with hunks and compiled with out warnings.
> Basic tests are passed.
I'm interested in hearing opinions from multiple people about the
following two questions:
1. Is the new behavior better than the old behavior?
2. Will breaking backward compatibility make too many people unhappy?
My guess is that the answer to the first question is "yes" and that
the answer to the second one is "no", but this is clearly a
significant incompatibility, so I'd like to hear some more opinions
before concluding that we definitely want to do this.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian.Vondendriesch | 2015-11-05 21:19:34 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #12989: pg_size_pretty with negative values |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2015-11-05 21:15:39 | Re: Note about comparation PL/SQL packages and our schema/extensions |