Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> >>> fix ALTER SCHEMA RENAME for sequence dependency, or remove feature
> >>
> >> I've posted a proposed patch to fix this. The patch requires an initdb
> >> (to add new sequence functions), so if we do that we may as well also
> >> fix the 32/64bit risk mentioned here:
> >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-09/msg01241.php
> >>
> >> Also, the floor seems open to discuss whether or not to revert the file
> >> access functions to their pre-beta2 APIs. I've got mixed feelings about
> >> that myself, but you can certainly make a case that the current
> >> definitions are not enough cleaner than what was there before to justify
> >> changing. This seems particularly true for pg_cancel_backend(), which
> >> already was in the core in 8.0.
> >
> > I am thinking we should keep things as they are now.
>
> The problem isn't whether or not they should be changed, the problem is
> that they were changed *during* beta AND *against* the direction that
> discussion on these changes went ... pre-beta would have been more
> acceptable, but pre-feature freeze would have been much preferred ... but
> *post-beta*, this should never have happened unless it created a critical
> bug, which I have seen no arguments that it did ...
It was done quickly to complete it for beta2. Neil talked to Tom and me
about it before he made the change. Obviously we all guessed wrong on
this one.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073