On 02/26/2014 08:09 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> I think that this is not a great idea. I think that we should do away
>>> with the GUC, but keep the function hstore_print() so we can pretty
>>> print that way. I don't believe that this falls afoul of the usual
>>> obvious reasons for not varying the behavior of IO routines with a
>>> GUC, since it only varies whitespace, but it is surely pretty
>>> questionable to have this GUC's setting vary the output of hstore_out,
>>> an IMMUTABLE function.
>> I don't see this in the submitted patch. What's going on?
> I'm working off the Github branch here, as of an hour ago, since I was
> under the impression that the patches submitted are merely snapshots
> of that (plus I happen to strongly prefer not dealing with patch files
> for something this big). Which submitted patch?
>
>
It's in the nested hstore patch. I've been splitting this into two
pieces. See
<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/530D0646.8020407@dunslane.net> for
the latest hstore piece.
cheers
andrew
