Re: language handlers in public schema?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: language handlers in public schema?
Date: 2005-06-24 01:24:23
Message-ID: 42BB60C7.5050109@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>Is there any reason for us to keep putting the language handler
>>functions in the public schema?
>>
>>
>
>I believe one of the issues there is that pg_dump doesn't dump functions
>that are in pg_catalog. You could possibly fix it to make an exception
>for functions that are referenced by pg_language entries, but I think
>this would be a nontrivial change.
>
>

Hmm. Could we not just add something this condition:

or pg_catalog.format_type(prorettype, NULL) != 'language_handler'

in pg_dump.c around line 2191?

I'd like to get this done, but I don't think I'll have time before July
1. How about putting it on the TODO list?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-06-24 01:28:09 Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-06-24 01:12:16 Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-06-24 01:28:09 Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-06-24 01:12:16 Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes