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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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