Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > My feeling is basically this- either we make a clean break to the new
> > syntax and catalog representation, or we just use the same approach the
> > existing attriubtes use. Long term, I think your proposed syntax and an
> > int64 representation is better but it'll mean a lot of client code that
> > has to change. I don't really like the idea of changing the syntax but
> > not the representation, nor am I thrilled with the idea of supporting
> > both syntaxes, and changing the syntax without changing the
> > representation just doesn't make sense to me as I think we'd end up
> > wanting to change it later, making clients have to update their code
> > twice.
>
> I don't see any reason why it has to be both or neither.
I was thinking we would change the catalogs and implement the new syntax
for new and old settings, but also keep the old syntax working as a
backward compatibility measure. I don't see what's so terrible about
continuing to support the old syntax; we do that in COPY and EXPLAIN,
for example.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services