Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
Date
Msg-id 25153.951748801@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size  (wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck))
List pgsql-hackers
wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) writes:
>> But we just required initdb for lztext.  If we need another initdb
>> later, maybe we should do it?

That was what I was thinking, too.  But...

>     LZTEXT  was  a  fairly  limited change, tested out before and
>     just reapplied. This time you ask for mucking with the family
>     of  node-print  and  -read  functions. Even if it's a limited
>     area of code affected, I don't feel comfortable doing it now.

Yeah, Jan is probably right --- too much risk of breaking something
and not noticing till after release.  7.0 will already allow longer
rules than 6.5 because of lztext, so it's not critical to do this now.
Let's wait.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Don Baccus
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ?