Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
If there are no objections, I'm going to remove the following items
from the list at
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items
change cardinality() for multi-dim arrays?
Drop; there's no consensus that this should be changed
I don't think we should let this go quite so easily, as this is a new
function, so the bias should be to "getting it right" rather than "don't
change it".
I think it is right already, but the point is debatable.
The supplied functionality is not only surprising, but easily obtained by an
existing function. ISTM if we're supplying a new function it should have new
functionality.
Well, it's a compatibility function...
compatible with what?
The other thing that frankly bothers me is that we appear to have
acquired this function by a curious process which involved no proposal
or discussion that I have discovered. If there had been proper and
adequate discussion before the item was committed I wouldn't be making a
fuss now, whether or not I agreed with the result.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
