Joshua Drake wrote: > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:48:06 +0100 > Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "Hannu Krosing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Maybe there should be something in postgreSQL docs that warns users > > > against using functions in any non-trivial circumstances, as > > > functions are not expected to behave like the rest of postgreSQL > > > features and there is not plan to fix that ? > > > > Now who's trolling :) > > Although I read his remark as sarcastic after reading the entire > thread I have to say it may be a good idea to have the something in > the docs about the limitation. I never think about it anymore > because I am used to the behavior. I can see where and entity > like skype who has I am sure thousands of procedures would have this > as a constant irritant. > > Do I think it should be pushed back to 8.3.x; no. It is a feature. I > don't consider the existing behavior a bug. I consider it a limitation > and we don't back patch fixes for limitations.
The bottom line here is that we don't have the time to explain or justify our backpatch policy every time someone shows up with a bug that needs to be fixed. If you want to create your own version of Postgres, go ahead; no one is stopping you. But if we backpatched everything and we introduced bugs or change behavior, more people would complain. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
