Re: [17] Special search_path names "!pg_temp" and "!pg_catalog"

On Sat, 2023-08-19 at 07:18 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> cannot be better special syntax
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION xxx()
> RETURNS yyy AS $$ ... $$$
> SET SEARCH_PATH DISABLE
>
> with possible next modification
>
> SET SEARCH_PATH CATALOG .. only for pg_catalog
> SET SEARCH_PATH MINIMAL .. pg_catalog, pg_temp

I agree that we should consider new syntax, and there's a related
discussion here:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/2710f56add351a1ed553efb677408e51b060e67c(dot)camel(at)j-davis(dot)com

Regardless, even with syntax changes, we need something to print when
someone does a "SHOW search_path", i.e. some representation that
indicates pg_temp is excluded. That way it can also be saved and
restored.

> I question if we should block search path settings when this setting
> is used. Although I set search_path, the search_path can be
> overwritten in function of inside some nesting calls

If so, that should be a separate feature. For the purposes of this
thread, we just need a way to represent a search path that excludes
pg_temp and/or pg_catalog.

Regards,
Jeff Davis