On 2021-Apr-29, Tom Lane wrote: > (On the other hand, if it were written the other way already, I'd also > argue to leave it like that. Basically, this sort of change is just not > worth troubling over. It doesn't improve things meaningfully and it > creates back-patching hazards.)
This argument applies equally well to the patch at http://postgr.es/m/CAAJ_b94M_1YoybQpNjmD+ZFZkUT2OpoP5xnFiWM+X=xh-nx...@mail.gmail.com so if we reject this one, we should reject that one too. CC'ed patch author. -- Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile
