Re: [BUGS] ltree::text not immutable? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: [BUGS] ltree::text not immutable?
Date
Msg-id 545BE9FD.90700@BlueTreble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] ltree::text not immutable?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] ltree::text not immutable?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 11/5/14, 7:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Attached is a complete patch along these lines.  As I suggested earlier,
>> >this just makes the relevant changes in ltree--1.0.sql and
>> >pg_trgm--1.1.sql without bumping their extension version numbers,
>> >since it doesn't seem important enough to justify a version bump.
>> >
> I don't understand why you went to all the trouble of building a
> versioning system for extensions if you're not going to use it.

I was about to dismiss this comment since I don't see any real need  for a version bump here, except that AFAIK there's
noway to upgrade an extension without bumping the version, other than resorting to hackery.
 

So I think this does need to be an upgrade. :(
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Log inability to lock pages during vacuum
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: BRIN indexes - TRAP: BadArgument