Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Well, if we apply this, it has the possibility to break existing
>>> dumps.
BTW, it occurs to me that we could dodge that objection, with much less
work than Robert suggests, if we just made the message be a WARNING not
an ERROR. I think that'd do just as well in terms of what the message
could usefully accomplish, ie, steer people away from doing things that
won't work. Still not sure that it's worth doing though,
regards, tom lane
