Re: A problem with dump/restore of views containing whole row references

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > Right, what I'm asking is whether or not we actually want that side
> > effect in all cases, and specifically in this case where it's clearly
> > not necessary.
>
> We could dodge that case by only changing the behavior when showstar is
> false; there is no need to change it otherwise. The patch has assorted
> other bugs too, in particular its schema-name treatment seems completely
> wrong (hint: RelationIsVisible is not the same as TypeIsVisible, and
> it's at best shaky to assume that a relation's name is the same as its
> rowtype's name anyway).
>
> More generally, it seems rather inelegant to be forcibly adding a cast
> when in most cases the existing notation is not wrong. AFAICS the
> plain "relname" notation is only ambiguous if there is a column of the
> same name as the relation. I wonder whether we should instead address
> this by not letting the parser strip the "no op" cast in the first
> place.
>

You mean that the parser should not strip the "no op" cast in all cases or
in the case only when the parser somehow detects a column of the same name
as the relation?

>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
Abbas
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company