|From:||Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>|
|To:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org|
|Cc:||Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: SQL/JSON functions vs. ECPG vs. STRING as a reserved word|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2022-05-29 Su 16:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> More generally, I feel like we have a process problem: there needs to
> be a higher bar to adding new fully- or even partially-reserved words.
> I might've missed it, but I don't recall that there was any discussion
> of the compatibility implications of this change.
Thanks for fixing this while I was away.
I did in fact raise the issue on 1 Feb, see
but nobody responded that I recall. I guess I should have pushed the
|Next Message||Vladimir Sitnikov||2022-05-31 15:59:23||Re: PostgreSQL Limits: maximum number of columns in SELECT result|
|Previous Message||Tom Lane||2022-05-31 15:09:11||Re: PG15 beta1 sort performance regression due to Generation context change|