On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker <badalex@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 11:04, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> If we were a bit earlier in the 9.0 cycle I would suggest that this
>>> confusion is a sufficient reason to drop the one-argument form of
>>> string_agg. It's too late now though.
>
>> FWIW I think we can still change it. Isn't this type of issue part
>> of what beta is for? If we were in RC that would be a different story
>> :)
>
> Well, it'd take an initdb to get rid of it. In the past we've avoided
> forcing initdb post-beta1 unless it was Really Necessary. OTOH, we seem
> to be in the mode of encouraging beta testers to test pg_upgrade, so
> maybe that concern isn't worth much at the moment.
I vote fix it. This is going to be a high travel function, and should be right.
merlin
