Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts
Date
Msg-id 1015891540.2119.36.camel@jiro
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
On Mon, 2002-03-11 at 17:58, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > There is no cost to PostgreSQL in normal operation, since that part of
> > the source isn't affected at all.  All that is affected is some of the
> > test scripts and documentation.  I see little risk to incorporating
> > the patch, but of course it's your decision.
>
> We are kind of picky about adding complexity when it isn't required.

I wouldn't describe "standards compliance" as "complexity". I haven't
look at the patch extensively, but are there any areas where the new
behavior is not functionally identical to the old code, just more
standards compliant?

Cheers,

Neil

--
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC


pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Domain Support -- another round