Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> On 2014-05-10 19:19:22 -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> > On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > >
> > > Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > > > I don't even understand why it's questionable whether this should be
> > > > fixed.
> > >
> > > Sigh. We have some debate isomorphic to this one every year, it seems
> > > like. The argument why it shouldn't be fixed now is: ITS. TOO. LATE.
> > > Which part of that isn't clear to you?
> > >
> >
> > Sorry but I don't understand why it's too late. The 9.4 branch not been
> > created yet.
>
> The problem is that once the beta is in progress (starting tomorrow),
> the projects tries to avoid changes which require a dump and restore (or
> pg_upgrade). Since the patch changes the catalog it'd require that.
>

Hmmmm... so the other option maybe is create an extension to add this
operators.

Thoughts?

--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br
>> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com
>> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello