Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 13:56:50 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: John Naylor <john.naylor@postgresql.org>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Set the volatility of the timestamptz version of
 date_bin() back
Message-ID: <202109031756.d6li4szj5zje@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAFBsxsFB2OFLgaiwCR-3Tbb3nD16OXMwnqSC+2d_0Ze=p4qm1w@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202109031756.d6li4szj5zje%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-Sep-03, John Naylor wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:46 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2021-Sep-03, John Naylor wrote:
> > These catversion bumps in branch 14 this late in the cycle seem suspect.
> > Didn't we have some hesitation to push multirange unnest around beta2
> > precisely because of a desire to avoid catversion bumps?
> 
> This was for correcting a mistake (although the first commit turned out to
> be a mistake itself), so I understood it to be necessary.

A crazy idea might have been to return to the original value.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera              Valdivia, Chile  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/