* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote: > On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 06:51:18PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > Now, what I've honestly been hoping for on this thread was for someone > > to speak up and point out why I'm wrong about this concern and explain > > how this patch addresses that issue. If that's been done, I've missed > > it..
[...]
So, apparently I'm not wrong about my concern, but no one seems to share
my feelings on this change.
I continue to hold that this could end up being a slippery slope for us
to go down wrt 'correctness' vs. 'do whatever the user wants'. If we
keep this to only COPY and where the table has to be truncated/created
in the same transaction (which requires the user to have sufficient
privileges to do non-MVCC-safe things on the table already), perhaps
it's alright. It'll definitely reduce the interest in finding a real
solution though, which is unfortunate.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
