Обсуждение: BUG #2369: pg_dump function dependencies
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 2369 Logged by: Jonathan Ellis Email address: jbellis+ns@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 8.1.3 Operating system: linux Description: pg_dump function dependencies Details: I have many many instances of these two problems in pg_dump's output: 1) function code don't seem to be taken into account for dependencies for example, one function was dumped as follows (note the %TYPE use), but the general_permissions table was dumped much later: CREATE FUNCTION all_users_permission_id(character varying, integer, character varying) RETURNS integer AS $_$ DECLARE v_permission_type alias for $1; v_on_what_id alias for $2; v_on_which_table alias for $3; v_permission_id general_permissions.permission_id%TYPE; non-%TYPE uses get ignored too; e.g. a function containing this line, before the minions_power_v view was created: ttt := ttt + max(0, coalesce( (0.661 * (select sum(w.value) from weapons_v w where w.party_id = $1 and w.minion_id is not null) - (select sum(tp_total) from minions_power_v m where m.party_id = $1))::int , 0));
"Jonathan Ellis" <jbellis+ns@gmail.com> writes: > I have many many instances of these two problems in pg_dump's output: > 1) function code don't seem to be taken into account for dependencies No, it isn't, and this should not matter because pg_dump takes care to turn off check_function_bodies. If you have an actual problem, you need to exhibit it, not just claim there is a problem. BTW, what was the other problem? regards, tom lane
On 4/2/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > "Jonathan Ellis" <jbellis+ns@gmail.com> writes: > > I have many many instances of these two problems in pg_dump's output: > > > 1) function code don't seem to be taken into account for dependencies > > No, it isn't, and this should not matter because pg_dump takes care to > turn off check_function_bodies. Ah, that was the problem -- I manually split my dump file into two sections, so only the first section had this set. Sorry. BTW, what was the other problem? > Meh, I realized that one was a PEBKC and removed it, but forgot to fix the preamble. Yesterday wasn't a good day for me. :)