Re: Refactoring on DROP/ALTER SET SCHEMA/ALTER RENAME TO statement - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Refactoring on DROP/ALTER SET SCHEMA/ALTER RENAME TO statement
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYxuyCM-POHSMfLq2qnZ8xerMNxOiGTzr+nBQh6krTDHA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Refactoring on DROP/ALTER SET SCHEMA/ALTER RENAME TO statement  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Refactoring on DROP/ALTER SET SCHEMA/ALTER RENAME TO statement
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>>> So the buildfarm broke due to this change, because citext does
>
>> Thanks for fixing it.  Should we revert the original change?
>
> I still think it's reasonable to remove the extra downcasing step,
> but we'll have to document it as a change.  For instance, spelling
> C as either "C" or 'C' would work differently now.  The fact that
> the former is downcased seems quite surprising to me, so I don't
> think anybody would say that this isn't a better definition, but
> undoubtedly it could force people to change their source files.

So, should we add a note to all the LANGUAGE command pages in the
manual?  Or just include this in the release notes?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring
Next
From: Royce Ausburn
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring