> This had to be in on short notice (trys to move this to another release where squashed) b/c vested interests. From the article: > Even then, the discussion

> This had to be in on short notice (trys to move this to another release where squashed) b/c vested interests. From the article: > Even then, the discussion was not quite done; Momjian questioned merging this change so late in the PostgreSQL development cycle. ""My point is that we are designing the user API in the last weeks of the commitfest, which usually ends badly for us"". Fennema-Nio pointed out that the API was essentially unchanged from its initial, September form, and that months had been spent discussing alternatives. Haas said that such a small patch would not improve by being held up for another release cycle: ""I think it has to be right to get this done while we're all thinking about it and the issue is fresh in everybody's mind.""