Re: add_missing_from breaks existing views

Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews(at)supernews(dot)com> writes:
> On 2005-10-26, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Uh, no ... the global setting of add_missing_from does *not* tell you
>> anything about whether there exist views in the database that were
>> created under a different setting.

> I realize that; but is it also not the case that someone who creates a
> view that requires add_missing_from, and then turns it off, has _already_
> broken dump+restore on his own database?

No, because we consider that a client-local setting. This argument is
akin to saying that if a client loads some data with client_encoding FOO
into a database with server_encoding BAR, we are not responsible for
dumping and reloading the data correctly.

In hindsight I think there's no doubt that we blew it in not making
ruleutils.c reverse-list implicit RTEs some time ago. The handwriting
has been on the wall for that "feature" for a good while, and so we
should long ago have thought about how to migrate nonstandard views
to standard syntax. We missed the bet, though, so the question is now
how to cover our mistake. Pretending it's the user's mistake isn't
an answer that fits down my craw very well...

regards, tom lane