On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 04:27:48PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I think we're better off adding a new function and avoid changing the > signature of GetForeignServer et al. Or maybe rename the function and > keep the original name as a compatibility wrapper macro.
On the other hand, if we make the change visible because of a compilation failures, then modules would become aware of the problem and react? I would not expect modules to set missing_ok to true anyway as they expect those objects to exist, so I can live with a new function. What about naming those GetForeignServerExtended and GetForeignDataWrapperExtended? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
