| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments |
| Date: | 2021-06-04 21:07:05 |
| Message-ID: | 439421.1622840825@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> It would likely not be very hard to fix pg_dump to include explicit
> IN markers. I don't think this results in a compatibility problem
> for existing dumps, since they won't be taken from databases in
> which there are procedures with OUT arguments.
Actually, all we have to do to fix pg_dump is to tweak ruleutils.c
(although this has some effects on existing regression test outputs,
of course). So maybe it's not as bad as all that.
Here's a draft-quality patch to handle ALTER/DROP this way. I think
the code may be finished, but I've not looked at the docs at all.
0001 is the same patch I posted earlier, 0002 is a delta to enable
handling ALTER/DROP per spec.
regards, tom lane
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-reconsider-out-args-2.patch | text/x-diff | 73.7 KB |
| 0002-reallow-SQL-drop-syntax.patch | text/x-diff | 26.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2021-06-04 21:12:43 | Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?) |
| Previous Message | David Christensen | 2021-06-04 20:53:10 | Re: DELETE CASCADE |