| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Remove array_nulls? |
| Date: | 2015-12-18 17:12:21 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobHiSt8dXzr3Z6=qxjdnLuRQaOu=WH06-34AZBgBFSK9g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2015-12-18 12:06:43 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Well, Tom, Alvaro, and I all pretty much said that removing things
>> when it's blocking further development makes sense, but that there's
>> no hurry to remove anything else. That sounds like what you are
>> saying, too. So what's the actual disagreement here?
>
> I'm saying that 10 year deprecation periods don't make sense. Either we
> decide to remove the compat switch because we dislike it for $reasons,
> in which case it should be removed sooner. Or we decide to keep the
> switch indefinitely.
Forever is an awfully long time. I think that it's OK to remove
backward-compatibility features at some point even if they're not
really harming anything. I think the time before we do that should be
long, but I don't think it needs to be forever.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2015-12-18 17:19:00 | Re: Remove array_nulls? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-12-18 17:10:41 | Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table. |