On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: >> > Jaime Casanova wrote: >> >> i like this with or without the (), but maybe we are breaking client >> >> apps if change that >> >> > Ah, so you like FUNCTION. >> >> You can NOT change the line tag without almost certainly breaking >> log-reading tools like pgfouine. Even changing the content of the line >> risks that, and for no visible gain. >> >> This seems like the worst form of bike-shedding to me. This log entry >> has been formatted this way since 7.4, and nobody has ever complained >> about it, until you suddenly decided it was a problem. Leave it be. > > I propose to add '()' because it is confusing without it. I don't think > many people are using the feature or we would have received suggestions > for improvmement. As you can see, once I posted about it, there were a > number of people who wanted improvements.
I'm not sure if people affirmatively wanted improvements or if people were just discussing how to change it if a change was to be made. I don't think you can infer that lack of suggestions for improvement implies that no one is using it; it could equally well imply that everyone likes it the way it is. To be sure, I probably would have coded it a bit differently if I'd written the functionality originally, but I don't think it's horrible the way it is, and Tom is right that there is something to be said for consistency. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers