On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 01:46:40PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I pushed a fix for all that.
Shouldn't there be a test case as well? The patch I sent upthread was
doing the whole set, except that I did not bother
> The failure in pg_get_functiondef() is still there. While the immediate
> answer probably is to teach that function to emit correct CREATE PROCEDURE
> syntax, I continue to think that it's a bad idea to be putting zeroes into
> pg_proc.prorettype.
Yeah, or an error with a new function dedicated to procedures. I also
finc confusing the use of prorettype to track this object type.
This brings the amount of objects stored in pg_proc to four. Perhaps it
would be time to bring more clarity in pg_proc by introducing a prokind
column for functions, aggregates, window functions and procedures? I
don't feel really hot for an extra boolean column like proisproc.
--
Michael