On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:28:07PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> > Well, sometimes we underestimate the impact of changes, sometimes we
> > overestimate. The big problem is weighing the short-term problems of
> > change but not the long-term benefit of a change. This array problem
> > goes back to at least 2008:
> >
> > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/28026.1224611437@sss.pgh.pa.us
> >
> > so we have at least five years of confusion by not changing it then. I
> > am not saying we need to change it, but do think we need to weigh both
> > issues.
>
> As much as I hate the current behavior (my first response was "yeah, fix
> those babies!"), I think we don't have a choice about creating new
> function names and then waiting three years to deprecate the old ones.
> We really can't afford to put obstacles in the way of people upgrading,
> especially over an issue as minor as this one.
Perhaps we need to mark the TODO item as "will not fix".
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +