Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval)
Date: 2013-10-16 18:40:07
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZ_2j6n8BgRtSfJkh6_CSC8kJJabJ2Wh1pX+rmUEdURRg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Also, as Tom pointed out, at some point we have to either say we really
> support overloading or we don't.

We clearly do support overloading. I don't think that's at issue.
But as we all know, using it can cause formerly unambiguous queries to
become ambiguous and stop working.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2013-10-16 18:49:13 Re: Record comparison compiler warning
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2013-10-16 18:34:59 Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs