2008/11/30 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> There are two ways to fix this, both having some validity: > >> 1. We create a second version of pg_get_function_arguments() that produces >> arguments without default values decoration. This is probably the >> technically sound thing to do.
I'll prepare new patch with this change. > > Yes. I think that the argument for allowing parameter names in commands > like ALTER FUNCTION is that the user might consider them part of the > function's identity. This can hardly be claimed for default values. > > Also, there's a third possibility: we could revert the decision to allow > pg_dump to depend on pg_get_function_arguments in the first place. That > was really the lazy man's approach to begin with. The more we allow > pg_dump to depend on backend functions that work in a SnapshotNow world, > the more risk we have of producing inconsistent dumps. I don't understand well. Transactions is spanish village for me. So there will be some finalizing necessary from You or Peter. Regards Pavel Stehule > > regards, tom lane > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
