Re: So, are we going to bump catversion for beta5, or not?

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> We now have another reason to, which is Chris K-L's point about
>> unqualified names in the various SQL-language built-in functions.
>> I am about to commit that fix (with another catversion bump for
>> good measure...)

> Oh dear.  We really need this function-specific schema path that the SQL
> standard seems to talk about.

Possibly.  It's not happening for 7.4 though ...
        regards, tom lane