Re: [pgsql-patches] pg_get_domaindef - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From FAST PostgreSQL
Subject Re: [pgsql-patches] pg_get_domaindef
Date
Msg-id 13067.10381170812117.fast.fujitsu.com.au@MHS
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_get_domaindef  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [pgsql-patches] pg_get_domaindef  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-patches
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 02:25, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> > FAST PostgreSQL wrote:
> >> Please find attached the patch with modifications
> >
> > are you proposing to implement the other functions in this TODO item
> > (pg_get_acldef(), pg_get_typedefault(), pg_get_attrdef(),
> > pg_get_tabledef(), pg_get_functiondef() ) ?
>
> I haven't entirely understood the use case for any of these.  It's not

Any consensus on these functions? If we decide against having these then its
better to remove them from the TODO list temporarily/permanently.........

Rgds,
Arul Shaji


> pg_dump, for a number of reasons: one being that pg_dump still has to
> support older backend versions, and another being that every time we
> let backend SnapshotNow functions get involved, we take another hit to
> pg_dump's claim to produce a consistent MVCC snapshot.
>
> But my real objection is: do we really want to support duplicative code
> in both pg_dump and the backend?  Updating pg_dump is already a major
> PITA whenever one adds a new feature; doubling that work isn't
> attractive.  (And it'd be double, not just a copy-and-paste, because of
> the large difference in the operating environment.)  So I want to hear a
> seriously convincing use-case that will justify the maintenance load we
> are setting up for ourselves.  "Somebody might want this" is not
> adequate.
>
> Perhaps a better area of work would be the often-proposed refactoring of
> pg_dump into a library and driver program, wherein the library could
> expose individual functions such as "fetch the SQL definition of this
> object".  Unfortunately, that'll be a huge project with no payoff until
> the end...
>
>             regards, tom lane
This is an email from Fujitsu Australia Software Technology Pty Ltd, ABN 27 003 693 481. It is confidential to the
ordinaryuser of the email address to which it was addressed and may contain copyright and/or legally privileged
information.No one else may read, print, store, copy or forward all or any of it or its attachments. If you receive
thisemail in error, please return to sender. Thank you. 

If you do not wish to receive commercial email messages from Fujitsu Australia Software Technology Pty Ltd, please
emailunsubscribe@fast.fujitsu.com.au 


pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: WIP: Recursive Queries
Next
From: "Takayuki Tsunakawa"
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature: POSIX Shared memory support