Re: POLA violation with \c service=
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: POLA violation with \c service= |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoZu76G2bR=0bk-nY7uzrmkJHtebQYh07-xwP1a=Pkpg+w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: POLA violation with \c service= (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: POLA violation with \c service=
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > David Fetter wrote: > >> My thinking behind this was that the patch is a bug fix and intended >> to be back-patched, so I wanted to mess with as little infrastructure >> as possible. A new version of libpq seems like a very big ask for >> such a case. You'll recall that the original problem was that >> >> \c service=foo >> >> only worked accidentally for some pretty narrow use cases and broke >> without much of a clue for the rest. It turned out that the general >> problem was that options given to psql on the command line were not >> even remotely equivalent to \c, even though they were documented to >> be. > > So, in view of these arguments and those put forward by Pavel > downthread, I think the attached is an acceptable patch for the master > branch. It doesn't apply to back branches though; 9.4 and 9.3 have a > conflict in tab-complete.c, 9.2 has additional conflicts in command.c, > and 9.1 and 9.0 are problematic all over because they don't have > src/common. Could you please submit patches adapted for each group of > branches? I'm fine with this change in master, but I vote against back-patching it. This is not such an important problem that we need to take the risk of destabilizing existing installations. (Also, src/common is only 2 years old, so how would we back-patch anything touching that past 9.3 anyway?) -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: