| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Daymel Bonne Solís <dbonne(at)uci(dot)cu>, postgres-devel <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: system_information.triggers & truncate triggers |
| Date: | 2012-09-27 13:25:14 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobfipOAGw9T-bMzFTV=hmG7UE-Bxo5VQO6Pz-6CWC3ong@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> A different place where I wound up having to jump through considerable
> hoops when doing schema analytics was vis-a-vis identifying functions.
> I need to be able to compare schemas across databases, so oid-based
> identification of functions is a total non-starter. It appears that
> the best identification of a function would be based on the
> combination of schema name, function name, and the concatenation of
> argument data types. It wasn't terribly difficult to construct that
> third bit, but it surely would be nice if there was a view capturing
> it, and possibly even serializing it into a table to enable indexing
> on it. Performance-wise, function comparisons turned out to be one of
> the most expensive things I did, specifically because of that mapping
> surrounding arguments.
pg_proc.oid::regprocedure::text has been pretty good to me for this
sort of thing.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2012-09-27 13:27:54 | Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-09-27 13:22:40 | Re: data to json enhancements |