From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: language handlers in public schema? |
Date: | 2005-06-26 19:55:18 |
Message-ID: | 2619.1119815718@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Yeah. I think we'd need to add "where langlcallfoid != 0" so we don't
> pick up the internal/C/sql handlers. However, on closer inspection it
> appears that doind all this in pg_dump would be lots more invasive than
> I first thought.
Why --- what else is needed beyond the addition of those clauses to the
one query?
> me either, but I wonder if we should provide an option on pg_dump to
> restore function handlers found in public to whatever we decide about
> the above.
I don't see the need. If they were in public before, they can stay
there --- or the DBA can run createlang before running pg_restore to
put them where he wants.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2005-06-26 20:10:19 | Re: Implementing SQL/PSM for PG 8.2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-26 19:52:29 | Re: tsearch2 changes need backpatching? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-06-26 20:31:51 | Re: language handlers in public schema? |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2005-06-26 19:52:26 | Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity |