Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> I just don't buy this argument, at all. These functions names are
> certainly not the only things we're changing with PG10 and serious
> monitoring/backup/administration tools are almost certainly going to
> have quite a bit to adjust to with the new release, and that isn't news
> to anyone who works with PG.
Hmm --- we've been conducting this argument in a vacuum, but you're right,
we should consider what else is changing in v10. If you can point to
already-committed changes that mean that code using these functions will
almost certainly need changes anyway for v10, then that would greatly
weaken the argument for providing aliases.
regards, tom lane
