Обсуждение: Unqualified pg_catalog casts in pg_dump

When looking at something different, I happened to notice that pg_dump is a bit
inconsistent in how it qualifies casts to pg_catalog entities like regclass and
oid.  Most casts are qualified, but not all.  Even though it functionally is
the same, being consistent is a good thing IMO and I can't see a reason not to,
so the attached patch adds qualifications (the unqualified regclass cast in the
TAP test left on purpose).

cheers ./daniel

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
> When looking at something different, I happened to notice that pg_dump is a bit
> inconsistent in how it qualifies casts to pg_catalog entities like regclass and
> oid.  Most casts are qualified, but not all.  Even though it functionally is
> the same, being consistent is a good thing IMO and I can't see a reason not to,
> so the attached patch adds qualifications (the unqualified regclass cast in the
> TAP test left on purpose).

While this used to be important before we made pg_dump force a minimal
search_path, I'm not sure that there's any point in being picky about
it anymore.  (psql's describe.c is a different story though.)

            regards, tom lane

> On 23 Mar 2020, at 17:54, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
>> When looking at something different, I happened to notice that pg_dump is a bit
>> inconsistent in how it qualifies casts to pg_catalog entities like regclass and
>> oid.  Most casts are qualified, but not all.  Even though it functionally is
>> the same, being consistent is a good thing IMO and I can't see a reason not to,
>> so the attached patch adds qualifications (the unqualified regclass cast in the
>> TAP test left on purpose).
>
> While this used to be important before we made pg_dump force a minimal
> search_path, I'm not sure that there's any point in being picky about
> it anymore.  (psql's describe.c is a different story though.)

Correct, there is no functional importance with this.  IMO the value is in
readability and grep-ability.

cheers ./daniel

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 05:57:37PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Correct, there is no functional importance with this.  IMO the value is in
> readability and grep-ability.

This may cause extra conflicts when back-patching.
--
Michael