Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump, problem with user defined types?

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu (Thomas G(dot) Lockhart)
Cc: emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump, problem with user defined types?
Date: 1998-09-25 03:38:40
Message-ID: 199809250338.XAA24516@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > Looks like I am going to need some help here.
> > The old code dumped out regproc fields as the pg_proc.proname.
> >  There is a problem with this.  First, you can have multiple proname 
> > entries with the same proname.  The differ in their argument 
> > number/types.  The old code, when reading in a regproc name, would do 
> > a sequential scan of the pg_proc table, and find the first entry that 
> > matches the given proname.
> > If that is not the one you wanted, too bad.  No way to change it.
> 
> Hi Bruce. I'm sorry again for being so slow, but I'm still not
> understanding the initial conditions which prompted these changes. Are
> you fixing something proactively, or was there a specific example of
> misbehavior? The example I see in your mail with Tatsuo which now causes
> trouble is for type input and output routine names, which _are_ likely
> to be unique. 
> 
> Would it be possible for you to bracket the code in the cvs tree so that
> we can enable/disable the old behavior? That way we can see what has
> changed and how it used to behave. I suppose that would involve
> bracketing code in regprocin/out and in pg_dump??

Proactive fix.  See my other posting today that has an idea to roll back
the old behavour, while making sure the regproc name is unique.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Vadim MikheevDate: 1998-09-25 03:53:02
Subject: unfortunately...
Previous:From: Vadim MikheevDate: 1998-09-25 02:43:28
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Transaction system (proposal for 6.5)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group