On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:52:37PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > David Fetter wrote:
> >
> >> My thinking behind this was that the patch is a bug fix and intended
> >> to be back-patched, so I wanted to mess with as little infrastructure
> >> as possible. A new version of libpq seems like a very big ask for
> >> such a case. You'll recall that the original problem was that
> >>
> >> \c service=foo
> >>
> >> only worked accidentally for some pretty narrow use cases and broke
> >> without much of a clue for the rest. It turned out that the general
> >> problem was that options given to psql on the command line were not
> >> even remotely equivalent to \c, even though they were documented to
> >> be.
> >
> > So, in view of these arguments and those put forward by Pavel
> > downthread, I think the attached is an acceptable patch for the master
> > branch. It doesn't apply to back branches though; 9.4 and 9.3 have a
> > conflict in tab-complete.c, 9.2 has additional conflicts in command.c,
> > and 9.1 and 9.0 are problematic all over because they don't have
> > src/common. Could you please submit patches adapted for each group of
> > branches?
>
> I'm fine with this change in master, but I vote against back-patching
> it. This is not such an important problem that we need to take the
> risk of destabilizing existing installations.
So just to clarify, are you against back-patching the behavior change,
or the addition to src/common?
> (Also, src/common is only 2 years old, so how would we back-patch
> anything touching that past 9.3 anyway?)
I was hacking something together to add it. Should I stop?
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate