| From: | Shay Rojansky <roji(at)roji(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly(dot)burovoy(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <julien(dot)rouhaud(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: macaddr 64 bit (EUI-64) datatype support |
| Date: | 2016-11-04 08:55:26 |
| Message-ID: | CADT4RqBVGki0LCaW6C-015W3rMAa_UYV4HBevSVTs_oWPq3JfA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> Yes. Before doing this change, it is better to confirm the approach and
> then do all the changes.
>
> 1. Does everyone agrees that renaming the existing datatype without
> changing the OID?
>
As I said before, Npgsql for one loads data types by name, not by OID. So
this would definitely cause breakage.
For users who actually need the new variable-length type, it seems
perfectly reasonable to ask to switch to a new type - after all they're
making a change in their system. It would really be preferable to leave the
current type alone and create a new one.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-11-04 09:02:38 | Re: WAL consistency check facility |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-11-04 08:36:59 | Re: Re: [sqlsmith] FailedAssertion("!(XLogCtl->Insert.exclusiveBackup)", File: "xlog.c", Line: 10200) |