| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL access to database attributes |
| Date: | 2014-06-21 22:14:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRBundV6i0W5t8OYSgfuvz2V65FKxL1ZS4BW+RnxFh56sQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2014-06-21 23:14 GMT+02:00 Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com>:
> On 06/21/2014 10:11 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > I am looking createdb_alterdb_grammar_refactoring.v1.patch
> >
> > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/53868E57.3030908@dalibo.com
>
> Thank you for looking at this.
>
> > Is any reason or is acceptable incompatible change CONNECTION_LIMIT
> > instead CONNECTION LIMIT? Is decreasing parser size about 1% good enough
> > for breaking compatibility?
>
> How is compatibility broken? The grammar still accepts the old way, I
> just changed the documentation to promote the new way.
>
> > Surely this patch cannot be backported what is proposed there.
>
> There are reasons I can think of not to backport this first patch, but
> breaking compatibility isn't one of them.
>
I am sorry, tomorrow I have to read it again
Pavel
> --
> Vik
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Erik Rijkers | 2014-06-21 23:33:14 | Re: proposal: new long psql parameter --on-error-stop |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2014-06-21 22:10:45 | Re: proposal: new long psql parameter --on-error-stop |