Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> pg_dump doesn't really support that scenario, and I don't feel any
>> great need to make it do so. Per the comment in dumpProcLang:
> Is this assumption, like, documented someplace?
Uh, right there?
> I would be on board with the idea that you (or anyone, really) doesn't
> want to fix this because it's a fairly unimportant issue, but I balk
> at the notion that nothing is wrong here, because to me that looks
> busted.
Well, it's not just unimportant but smack in the middle of code that
is treading a very narrow path to avoid assorted version dependencies.
I don't want to risk breaking cases that are actually important in the
field to support something that's obviously a toy test case.
We might be able to make some simplification/rationalization here
whenever we desupport pg_dump from < 8.1 servers (ie pre pg_pltemplate).
But right now I'm afraid to touch it.
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
