| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Postgres-Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_get_functiondef() does not show LEAKPROOF for leakproof functions |
| Date: | 2015-05-28 14:18:04 |
| Message-ID: | 10877.1432822684@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Jeevan Chalke
> <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> If function is created with the LEAKPROOF option, then pg_get_functiondef()
>> does not show that in the returned definition.
>> Is it expected OR are we missing that option in pg_get_functiondef().
> Agreed. I guess that it has been simply forgotten. pg_proc can be
> easily queried, so functions marked as leakproof are easy to find out
> in any case.
Looks like a clear oversight to me. I had first thought that this might
have been intentional because pg_dump needed it to act like that --- but
pg_dump doesn't use pg_get_functiondef. I think it was simply forgotten.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ms | 2015-05-28 22:52:45 | BUG #13373: Imminent transaction id wrap around in spite of daily VACUUM |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-05-28 12:43:45 | Re: BUG #13365: pg9.4.0 isn't support windows xp |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2015-05-28 14:20:58 | Re: pg_upgrade resets timeline to 1 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-28 14:14:53 | Re: [Proposal] More Vacuum Statistics |