| From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE? |
| Date: | 2005-07-04 02:27:24 |
| Message-ID: | 20050704022724.GA60666@winnie.fuhr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:42:14AM +1000, Neil Conway wrote:
>
> Assuming the STRICT / IMMUTABLE changes are only going into HEAD, you
> can safely remove the PG_ARGISNULL() checks -- people upgrading from a
> prior version of Postgres (and therefore pgcrypto) will need to dump and
> reload anyway.
But if they restore a dump made with pg_dump or pg_dumpall, they'll
get the old catalog entries sans STRICT, no? People might rebuild
the module when they upgrade, but they might not think to drop and
recreate the functions since the definitions are already in the
dump. I suppose the Release Notes could mention that recreating
the functions is required; it could also show the SQL statements
necessary to update pg_proc so a drop/recreate wouldn't be necessary.
--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-07-04 02:29:37 | Re: Constraint Exclusion (Partitioning) - Initial Review |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-07-04 01:42:14 | Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE? |