Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> If anyone squawks we could think about a
>> faster update ...
> That assumes that someone working on using the planner hooks will read
> this thread - which might be reasonable - I guess they number of likely
> users is fairly small. But if they might miss it then it would be best
> to fix it ASAP, ISTM.
Well, it's not like we have never before changed internal APIs in a
minor update. (There have been security-related cases where we gave
*zero* notice of such changes.) Nor am I willing to surrender the
option to do so again. If there's somebody out there with a real
problem with this change, they need to speak up.
regards, tom lane
