On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On fre, 2011-01-14 at 18:45 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Marti Raudsepp <ma...@juffo.org> >> wrote: >> > There's a similar case with CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS, maybe this >> is >> > worth covering in an updated patch too? >> > And if I change that, people might expect the same from DROP X IF >> EXISTS too? >> >> It's far less clear what you'd change those cases to say, and they >> already emit a NOTICE, so it seems unnecessary. > > Maybe instead of the proposed patch, a notice could be added: > > NOTICE: existing object was replaced
Well, that would eliminate the backward-compatibility hazard, pretty much, but it seems noisy. I already find some of these notices to be unduly informative. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
