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