| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Yushu Chen <gentcys(at)gmail(dot)com>, "katja(dot)henke(at)foo(dot)ag" <katja(dot)henke(at)foo(dot)ag>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #19034: Recursive function with sql_body can replace an existing function but can not be created on it's own |
| Date: | 2025-09-07 21:09:06 |
| Message-ID: | c48613a5ef709ae349e7f9509fa52b578b0eaecb.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Fri, 2025-09-05 at 05:55 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > Sure, but creating a dump that will fail to load is not good.
> > I don't have a smarter idea that dumping standard SQL functions
> > in two statements like you suggested...
>
> When resolving the dependency graph for such a function can we prevent the
> oid of the parent and the oid of the child being the same value?
> Prohibit direct self-references so it fails even if you use “or replace”.
I am not sure I can follow. With "parent" and "child", do you mean the
function as it was originally created and the function after replacing
it with a recursive function? If yes, then that's not an option.
The main point of CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION is to preserve the oid.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-09-07 21:58:34 | Re: BUG #19034: Recursive function with sql_body can replace an existing function but can not be created on it's own |
| Previous Message | Katja Henke | 2025-09-07 15:34:46 | Re: BUG #19034: Recursive function with sql_body can replace an existing function but can not be created on it's own |