So, about that cast-to-typmod-minus-one business

So, about that cast-to-typmod-minus-one business

We had left it as an open issue whether or not to risk back-patching
5c056b0c2 into stable branches [1].  While updating the v14 release notes,
I realized that we can't put off that decision any longer, because we
have to decide now whether to document that as a new behavior in v14.

I'm inclined to back-patch, since nobody has complained about this
in 14beta3.  Thoughts?

			regards, tom lane

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CABNQVagu3bZGqiTjb31a8D5Od3fUMs7Oh3gmZMQZVHZ%3DuWWWfQ%40mail.gmail.com

Re: So, about that cast-to-typmod-minus-one business

Dean Rasheed  writes:
> On Sat, 18 Sep 2021, 18:06 Tom Lane,  wrote:
>> I'm inclined to back-patch

> +1

Done.

			regards, tom lane

Re: So, about that cast-to-typmod-minus-one business

+1 backporting

Tony

On 2021/9/19 01:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> We had left it as an open issue whether or not to risk back-patching
> 5c056b0c2 into stable branches [1].  While updating the v14 release notes,
> I realized that we can't put off that decision any longer, because we
> have to decide now whether to document that as a new behavior in v14.
>
> I'm inclined to back-patch, since nobody has complained about this
> in 14beta3.  Thoughts?
>
> 			regards, tom lane
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CABNQVagu3bZGqiTjb31a8D5Od3fUMs7Oh3gmZMQZVHZ%3DuWWWfQ%40mail.gmail.com

Re: So, about that cast-to-typmod-minus-one business

Re: So, about that cast-to-typmod-minus-one business