Jim,
* Jim Nasby (Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com) wrote:
> On 2/9/17 6:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>I'd love to nuke pg_shadow and all the other
> >>not-really-maintained backwards-compat things from when roles were
> >>added too.
> >Not sure if it's worth the work to rip out and such, but I'm mildly
> >supportive of this one too. Depends a bit on what all the other things
> >are ;)
>
> The problem with pg_shadow is unless you specifically looked at it
> in the docs after 8.1, you had no idea it was deprecated. I don't
> really think of it as deprecated.
It's not even maintained properly, I hardly see how it couldn't be
anything but deprecated, and the docs certainly are the right place, if
anywhere, to say that something is deprecated.
> As someone mentioned, forcing a user to install an extension makes
> the deprecation visible. Another option would be to have the backend
> spit out a WARNING the first time you access anything that's
> deprecated. Both of those are pertinent reminders to people that
> they need to change their tools.
Ugh. Please, no. Hacking up the backend to recognize that a given
query is referring to a deprecated view and then throwing a warning on
it is just plain ugly.
Let's go one step further, and throw an ERROR if someone tries to query
these views instead.
Thanks!
Stephen