Re: pg_dump does not honor namespaces when functions are used in index

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jean-Baptiste Quenot <jbq(at)caraldi(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump does not honor namespaces when functions are used in index
Date: 2010-06-17 15:30:39
Message-ID: AANLkTimUXm9vrI4Ebi6M-ndeJZlle1VXJKUFdQmqTgaW@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I actually wonder if we shouldn't automatically tag plpgsql functions
>> with the search_path in effect at the time of their creation (as if
>> the user had done ALTER FUNCTION ... SET search_path=...whatever the
>> current search path is...).
>
> That would be extremely expensive and not very backwards-compatible.
> In the case at hand, just writing "RETURN bar.bar();" would be the
> best-performing solution.
>

I wonder if we should have a mode for plpgsql functions where all name
lookups are done at definition time So the bar() function would be
resolved to bar.bar() and stored that way permanently so that pg_dump
dumped the definition as bar.bar().

That would be probably just as good as setting the search path on the
function for most users and better for some. It would have the same
problem with dynamic sql that a lot of things have though.

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2010-06-17 15:31:21 Re: ANNOUNCE list (was Re: [HACKERS] New PGXN Extension site)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-06-17 15:25:06 Re: Should the JSON datatype be a specialization of text?