From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: use pg_get_functiondef() in pg_dump |
Date: | 2020-08-15 14:36:51 |
Message-ID: | 870843.1597502211@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> I wouldn't say that it's *fundamentally* new, but nonethless it disturbs
> me that this proposal has pg_dump assembling CREATE FUNCTION commands in
> very different ways depending on the server version. I'd rather see us
> continuing to build the bulk of the command the same as before, and
> introduce new behavior only for deparsing the function body.
BTW, a concrete argument for doing it that way is that if you make a
backend function that does the whole CREATE-FUNCTION-building job in
exactly the way pg_dump wants it, that function is nigh useless for
any other client with slightly different requirements. A trivial
example here is that I don't think we want to become locked into
the proposition that psql's \ef and \sf must print functions exactly
the same way that pg_dump would.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-08-15 14:54:21 | Re: [BUG] Error in BRIN summarization |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-08-15 14:23:55 | Re: use pg_get_functiondef() in pg_dump |