On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:33 AM, David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: > I tend to think we err toward this too much. This seems like development > concerns trumping usability. Consider that anything someone took the time > to write and polish to make committable to core was obviously genuinely > useful to them - and for every person capable of actually taking things that > far there are likely many more like myself who cannot but have encountered > the, albeit minor, usability annoyance that this kind of function seeks to > remove.
Sure, an individual function like this has almost no negative impact. On the other hand, working around its absence is also trivial. You can create a wrapper function that does exactly this in a couple of lines of SQL. In my opinion, saying that people should do that in they need it has some advantages over shipping it to everyone. If you don't have it and you want it, you can easily get it. But what if you have it and you don't want it, for example because what you really want is a minimal postgres installation? You can't take anything in core back out again, or at least not easily. Everything about core is expanding very randomly - code size, shared memory footprint, all of it. If you think that has no downside for users, I respectfully disagree.
Not sure what y'all are discussing, but I should add that I would have committed this based solely upon Vik's +1.
My objection was made, then overruled; that works because the objection wasn't "it won't work", only a preference so I'm happy.
But I still don't know "meh" means.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services