Re: BUG #15572: Misleading message reported by "Drop function operation" on DB with functions having same name

David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Why can't we just remove the !noError check in the location where the
> error is raised?

I don't like that a bit --- the point of noError is to prevent throwing
errors, and it doesn't seem like it should be LookupFuncName's business
to decide it's smarter than its callers.  Maybe we need another flag
argument?

            regards, tom lane