Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Closing some 8.4 open items |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 49D89E79.8090102@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Closing some 8.4 open items (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: > >> Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> If there are no objections, I'm going to remove the following items >>> from the list at >>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items >>> >>> >>> change cardinality() for multi-dim arrays? >>> >>> Drop; there's no consensus that this should be changed >>> >> I don't think we should let this go quite so easily, as this is a new >> function, so the bias should be to "getting it right" rather than "don't >> change it". >> > > I think it is right already, but the point is debatable. > > >> The supplied functionality is not only surprising, but easily obtained by an >> existing function. ISTM if we're supplying a new function it should have new >> functionality. >> > > Well, it's a compatibility function... > > compatible with what? The other thing that frankly bothers me is that we appear to have acquired this function by a curious process which involved no proposal or discussion that I have discovered. If there had been proper and adequate discussion before the item was committed I wouldn't be making a fuss now, whether or not I agreed with the result. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: