Re: Scripting function definitions as SQL?

From: "Postgres User" <postgres(dot)developer(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: depesz(at)depesz(dot)com, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Scripting function definitions as SQL?
Date: 2008-05-11 19:08:36
Message-ID: b88c3460805111208t63736a4w50e2eeb5aab6e52a@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Yes, but I'm doing this from a Delphi program in Windows and that's
why I'm looking for a solution that's SQL-based.

It would be nice if one of the system catalog views handled it.

> hmmm .. "additional coding" seems a bit too much for a simple thing like
> this:
> pg_dump -s | perl -ne 'print if /^CREATE FUNCTION test_it/../^\s+LANGUAGE/'
>
> of course it would be cool to have switch to do it, but hey - it hardly
> even qualifies as one-liner. it's more "an expression" than code.

On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:43 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski
<depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:28:37AM -0700, Postgres User wrote:
> > Unfortunately I didn't see a way to tell pg_dump to dump only objects
> > of a specific type, like functions or sequences. It requires
> > additional coding to parse the output and that's less than ideal...
>
> hmmm .. "additional coding" seems a bit too much for a simple thing like
> this:
> pg_dump -s | perl -ne 'print if /^CREATE FUNCTION test_it/../^\s+LANGUAGE/'
>
> of course it would be cool to have switch to do it, but hey - it hardly
> even qualifies as one-liner. it's more "an expression" than code.
>
>
> --
> quicksil1er: "postgres is excellent, but like any DB it requires a
> highly paid DBA. here's my CV!" :)
> http://www.depesz.com/ - blog dla ciebie (i moje CV)
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Francisco Reyes 2008-05-11 23:52:00 Making sure \timing is on
Previous Message hubert depesz lubaczewski 2008-05-11 18:43:25 Re: Scripting function definitions as SQL?