Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2554506.1650382005@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 10:00:01AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> (A) This is a new feature. Wait for v16. >> (B) This is a bug fix. Commit it now and back-patch to v14. >> (C) This is a cleanup that is OK to put into v15 even after feature >> freeze but since it is a behavior change we shouldn't back-patch it. >> I vote for (C). What do other people think? > I thought the plan was to backpatch to v14. > v14 psql had an unintentional behavior change, rejecting \d > datname.nspname.relname. I agree that the v14 behavior is a bug, so ordinarily I'd vote for back-patching. A possible objection to doing that is that the patch changes the APIs of processSQLNamePattern and patternToSQLRegex. We would avoid making such a change in core-backend APIs in a minor release, but I'm not certain whether there are equivalent stability concerns for src/fe_utils/. On the whole I'd vote for (B), with (C) as second choice. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: