Re: [HACKERS] Trouble with COPY IN
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>, Maciek Sakrejda <msakrejda@truviso.com>, Samuel Gendler <sgendler@ideasculptor.com>, pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-07-23T13:40:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: > Kris Jurka wrote: >>> >>> I guess the obvious question is whether we shouldn't instead change >>> the docs to match the behavior. I suspect there's almost no chance >>> we'd consider back-patching a change of this type, since it is a clear >>> behavior change. And even if we did, there would still be people >>> running servers with the old behavior with which JDBC and other >>> drivers would have to cope. Having two different behaviors might be >>> worse than the status quo. >>> >> >> It is a clear behavior change, but that's what bug fixes are. > > That was my first reaction. I don't think we're in the business if > redefining bugs out of existence. I certainly understand that reaction - I just worry that there might be people depending on the current behavior. We really don't want to get a reputation for breaking things in minor releases. But this is not an area of the code I'm very familiar with, and I'm not in a good position to judge the likelihood of breakage, so I'll defer to those who are... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company